We performed a comparison between Frends and webMethods API Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product has valuable features for version control."
"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 user-friendly interface for constructing integration solutions is also a notable benefit."
"The developer portal is a valuable feature."
"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."
"The cloud version of the solution is very easy to set up."
"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."
"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution for me has been the configuration-based UI. Once you get the hang of it, it enables you to easily develop an API. In addition, it has many in-built policies that are quite handy."
"There were no complexities involved in the setup phase...The product is able to meet my company's API protection needs."
"It's a good tool, and it has a stable messaging broker."
"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."
"One of the primary areas for improvement is a more mobile-friendly interface for the control center."
"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."
"With performance, there is room for improvement in regards to if we would like to put another extra layer of security on it, such as SSL. This is affecting their performance quite significantly. They need to improve the process of managing the SSL and other things inside their solutions, so there will not be quite such a significant impact to the performance."
"With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved."
"It is an expensive solution and not very suitable for smaller businesses."
"The configuring of the JWT token would be improved as it is a confusing process. We require more information on this part of the solution."
"There are things that could be improved with the webMethods API gateway. One thing is that it's too attached to the integration service and we'd like it to be a little bit more independent. We would like for them to separate operations so that it doesn't rely on the bulky integration server and so that it can be used everywhere."
Frends is ranked 22nd in API Management with 3 reviews while webMethods API Gateway is ranked 11th in API Management with 10 reviews. Frends is rated 8.6, while webMethods API Gateway is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Frends writes "Offers simplicity, ease of customization, and visibility of integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods API Gateway writes "We developed several services in the cloud using a sandbox environment for our last hackathon". Frends is most compared with , whereas webMethods API Gateway is most compared with Apigee, webMethods.io Integration, Kong Gateway Enterprise, webMethods Microgateway and 3scale API Management. See our Frends vs. webMethods API Gateway report.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
