We performed a comparison between IBM API Connect and webMethods.io API 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."It's quite flexible and easy to deploy, especially for beginners. It has almost all the features that an API gateway should have."
"The gateway is the most valuable aspect of this solution."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it is very easy to use and is something that is easily configurable."
"This solution is ready to scale and already supports our agile CICD."
"It is quite stable. We've not had any problem. It has made for a good buy because we are finding that other companies that have similar set ups go down maybe once a month."
"WSRR is a powerful component for getting the endpoints."
"Our version supports containerized integration. I can write APIs, which can be moved into a testing environment without needing a forklift. It can check if APIs are compliant before moving them into production."
"It is easy to use and stable."
"The performance is good."
"Clients choose webMethods.io API for its intuitive interface, promoting seamless interaction and quick communication between systems."
"IBM info-center help documentation also needs improvement. Competitive product like Apigee provide out of the box policies to run Javascript, JAVA and better/flexible logging policies."
"It needs to be less taxing on compute resources."
"Understanding the architecture, deployment criteria, and communication methods of the installation can be time-consuming."
"In the next version, I don't know if they've already been included it or not, but the designer and all the tools should be on the cloud. I don't want any external installation or local installation."
"The installation was difficult with the IBM toolkit."
"The automation and the simplicity could be improved."
"Like any typical IBM infrastructure setup, you need to learn to set it up yourself. It's not one of those simple zip files or an archive unzip and you're up and running in some few minutes. Knowledge to set it up is key."
"While Azure API Management offers configurable scalability, IBM API Connect relies on Kubernetes clusters. This might seem manual and require defining cluster instances upfront, but it's completely customizable and not on-the-fly scaling. It's completely custom-driven, not on-the-fly scaling, which some may consider cumbersome."
"I would like the solution to provide bi-weekly updates."
"A potential drawback of webMethods.io API is its adaptability to legacy systems, which can vary in compatibility."
IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 73 reviews while webMethods.io API is ranked 30th in API Management with 2 reviews. IBM API Connect is rated 8.0, while webMethods.io API is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM API Connect writes "Good speed and performance, but it's based on a bit dated architecture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods.io API writes "Offers a strategic toolset for gradual integration advancement". IBM API Connect is most compared with Apigee, IBM DataPower Gateway, Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and Amazon API Gateway, whereas webMethods.io API is most compared with Apigee and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager. See our IBM API Connect vs. webMethods.io API 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.
