No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Frends vs IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 17, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Frends
Ranking in API Management
29th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM webMethods Hybrid Integ...
Ranking in API Management
17th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
95
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (5th), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (13th), Cloud Data Integration (12th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the API Management category, the mindshare of Frends is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration is 3.3%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration3.3%
Frends0.7%
Other96.0%
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

Lauri Vanhanen - PeerSpot reviewer
Development Manager at ELO
Integration platform has simplified logistics workflows and has streamlined complex order handling
The best aspect is that it is very easy to use. The UI is very intuitive, and you can learn it very quickly because the basic principles are straightforward and easy to search. Frends has a great UI, but the UI is missing role-based permissions. You can filter your integrations by roles and add several users to roles, but in the UI, the functionality for this kind of management feature is not optimal. User management or user role management could be improved.
YM
Developer at a hospitality company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Offers strong integration capabilities and reliable features but needs pricing and scaling improvements
Many things are evolving with the AI buzz in the market. What I would like to see improved or enhanced in webMethods.io in the future is that since webMethods.io is already under IBM, I think IBM will introduce and integrate AI into it. Additionally, regarding what webMethods.io can improve is the license cost. Other cloud players are also providing the same kind of functionality, such as AWS and Azure. webMethods.io is being installed on-premises, but AWS is providing it directly in the cloud. When comparing the license cost and request per minute cost, webMethods.io needs to address that. There are many competitors in the market for this.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"One of the benefits is the speed of creating something new. Second, it's replacing the old integration quite fast. Then it is like the visibility of the integration and the possibility to see what is happening in the integration."
"The product has valuable features for version control."
"The best aspect is that it is very easy to use."
"The user-friendly interface for constructing integration solutions is also a notable benefit."
"I feel comfortable using this product with its ease of building interfaces for developers. This is a better integration tool for integrating with various applications like Oracle, Salesforce, mainframes, etc. It works fine in the integration of legacy software as well."
"This solution is flexible and can be used across a number of projects."
"WebMethods.io is a powerful tool, but it requires skilled people who can fully utilize its potential."
"Integration Server does our business-to-business integrations, and its adapters and connectors provide the fastest way to build an integration because we can immediately connect to backend systems without creating a lot of our own custom code, while the vendor’s full support for these adapters brings long-term stability to our services."
"From a user perspective, the feature which I like the most about Integration Server is its designer."
"The product is very stable."
"It is an integration platform, so it has improved my organization by giving it one common platform to work with multiple systems."
"Operationally, I consider the solution to be quite good."
 

Cons

"One of the primary areas for improvement is a more mobile-friendly interface for the control center."
"Logging should be better."
"Another enhancement includes the monitoring part. It would be nice to have some sort of maybe mobile app on which we can see how integrations are running if there are some problems, and getting those alerts on the mobile would be really nice."
"It is a new application and lacks some essential features compared to competitors."
"The installation process is very complex, there being many products, each having its own."
"When migration happens from the one release to an upgraded release from Software AG, many of the existing services are deprecated and developers have to put in effort testing and redeveloping some of the services. It would be better that upgrade releases took care to support the lower-level versions of webMethods."
"The Software AG Designer could be more memory-efficient or CPU-efficient so that we can use it with middle-spec hardware."
"In 2008, the technical support's response time was much longer than expected."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The technical support team pays attention to our issues but at the same time, they don't seem to have an in-depth technical background."
"The installation process should be simplified for first time users and be made more user-friendly."
"For code version control, you need to use some external software."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Recent changes in their pricing have removed this benefit, moving towards process-specific pricing."
"The pricing is quite fair."
"It is expensive, but we reached a good agreement with the company. It is still a little bit expensive, but we got a better deal than the previous one."
"I signed a three-year deal with them. It is a yearly locked-in price for the next three years."
"Based on our team discussions and feedback, it is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."
"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."
"The vendor is flexible with respect to pricing."
"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."
"The pricing is a yearly license."
"This is not a cheap solution but, compared to other products such as those offered by IBM, the pricing is similar."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
35%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Educational Organization
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise65
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Frends?
Logging should be better. Third-party software logging should be integrated into the monitors of the front-end integrations, but it does not monitor the third-party connectors through that. Those l...
What is your primary use case for Frends?
We had many different applications for Frends. For file transferring of different types, we modified the files and then used it for logistical processes including warehousing, inventory checkups, a...
What advice do you have for others considering Frends?
If you need an integration platform, I would recommend Frends. I give this product a rating of 8 out of 10.
What needs improvement with webMethods Integration Server?
The alignment of on-premise and cloud versions needs improvement.
What needs improvement with webMethods Trading Networks?
webMethods.io does not currently have certain features, and we have to do coding as well. However, they have recently come up with a hybrid application where users will be able to use drag-and-drop...
What is your primary use case for webMethods Trading Networks?
We are primarily focused on IBM webMethods. I am part of the Center of Excellence team, where we involve ourselves in proposals and providing solutions to clients. webMethods.io is a middleware too...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Frends vs. IBM webMethods Hybrid Integration and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.