Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

IBM App Connect vs WSO2 Enterprise Integrator comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

IBM App Connect
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (11th)
WSO2 Enterprise Integrator
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (25th), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Data Integration and Access solutions, they serve different purposes. IBM App Connect is designed for Cloud Data Integration and holds a mindshare of 4.8%, up 3.3% compared to last year.
WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, on the other hand, focuses on Data Integration, holds 0.6% mindshare, up 0.4% since last year.
Cloud Data Integration
Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

Mehdi El Filahi - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers flexible adapters, good scalability but logging can be difficult at times
There is room for improvement in the logging messages. Sometimes, if you put someone new into App Connect, they can abandon it the same day. The logging is really painful. However, IBM has made efforts to integrate with Elasticsearch for logging, so that's an improvement. Overall, the logging can be difficult at times. One more important point is that if IBM improves its CI/CD capabilities, it will make a big difference. Right now, I have to create my own CI/CD setup from scratch for every client, which is inefficient. Back in 2013, I worked with Sonic ESB, and even then, it had CI/CD with Maven. With App Connect, you need to build everything yourself when using tools like Jenkins, Bamboo, or CircleCI. IBM really needs to provide official support for this.
Ritesh_Shah - PeerSpot reviewer
Decreases the development timeframe and costs
The main issue with the product is pricing. It uses core-based pricing for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and API Manager. It would be best if you had APIM by default. It provides many connectors for easy integration with third-party systems. Often, customers decide to develop using open-source tools like Spring Boot if there aren't many connectors required to avoid increasing costs. They'll develop this way and then deploy using APIM, the bare minimum needed. It is mainly required for very complicated setups with many connectors. In the implementations I've seen, people often used open-source tools because there weren't many third-party systems involved—just their organization's own systems. From WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, I expect them to bring up more and more connectors in the future. That's the main expectation. Having more connectors in various areas will help us when discussing new requirements. I don't have any specific use case right now, so I can't name a particular connector. But, as new technologies emerge, the relevant connectors should be there for those. WSO2 Enterprise Integrator mainly helps with the integration part, which can be simplified only if you have relevant connectors for whatever you're doing.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I would say that the most valuable feature is the array of connectors and integration tools."
"The most valuable feature is the security."
"Provides good security features."
"One of the most beneficial features is the ability to handle multiple communication technologies, like integrating Kafka flows, which is helpful as other teams heavily use it. Regarding error handling, I initially wrote most of the handling myself. While built-in features for error handling are built-in, it largely depends on the developer. We use a custom solution that catches all exceptions, logs them in a database, and replays them as needed. It has been effective for us for over twenty years."
"The most valuable feature is the user-friendliness of the application."
"The solution is fast and supports Open UI 3.0 certification."
"It's a powerful application for collaboration. It has many features for customization and integration."
"It can handle API conversions with mapping and transformation rules, simplifying the development process."
"I like the user-friendly system and development of the service-oriented architecture."
"The installation process is easy."
"The drag-and-drop features for connectors are very valuable."
"It's a very complete product. It allows us to network security and add more layers of security to the system."
"It's a consolidated product. It works and it does its job pretty well."
"The customer service executives are very responsive."
"In my opinion, the most valuable aspect of this solution is its extensive range of adaptors and connectors. This feature holds significant importance and provides great value to users."
"The productivity is the most valuable feature. It is very easy to write remediations."
 

Cons

"IBM App Connect should improve security features."
"In the next release, I would like to get some quality connectors."
"They reply in one or two hours at most, but they could be better."
"Updates are constantly delayed."
"I've been using IBM App Connect for about twenty-five years, and while I like it, there are some areas for improvement. The trace policy is ridiculous, and the biggest issue is the cost—it's expensive. People would use it much more if the price point weren't so high."
"IBM needs to enhance and have a stronger offering for the event streaming part because this is the future needed for the containerization and the new integration requirement."
"The interface could be better."
"Finding developers for the product is difficult since it is a niche solution. I know the OpenShift environment is running well for the microservice environment. We had some issues with the other environment we tried to implement. It can be easily implemented internally, but we have some problems in practice."
"The main issue with the product is pricing. It uses core-based pricing for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and API Manager. It would be best if you had APIM by default. It provides many connectors for easy integration with third-party systems."
"In my opinion, the administration model and interface, of Carbon, are lacking in terms of its features and user experience."
"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I would like to see better documentation for the open-source version."
"There are a lot of security settings that when you apply you have to re-apply again every time you modify a setting. It is something that really needs to be enhanced."
"The customization can be a bit difficult."
"I would like to see them bring back a feature, from earlier versions, that was very useful in debugging and finding issues."
"The setup can be difficult for those not familiar with the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Initially, App Connect was quite expensive because the cost was based on the number of processors we used. However, it's now based on containers, which means we can be more specific about our consumption and get a better price."
"The solution's pricing isn't cheap, but you can get good discounts based on your competitive deal."
"IBM App Connect's pricing is high compared to other products."
"App Connect is not cheap."
"The licensing cost for IBM App Connect is very high."
"It is very expensive if we want to scale."
"The cost depends upon the consumer."
"The price could be better."
"The solution costs about 20,000 or 30,000 euros per year, per instance."
"It is a low-cost solution."
"The pricing of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for enterprise subscriptions can be considered expensive, especially from the perspective of someone who prefers open-source software."
"The cost is better than IBM Cloud Pak."
"The open-source, unsupported version is available free of charge."
"I rate the product price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
48%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Computer Software Company
24%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Insurance Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM App Connect?
I like the adapters. The adapters help us achieve scalability. If you want to connect to SAP, there's an adapter. Salesforce? There's an adapter. You want to connect to another system? There's like...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM App Connect?
IBM App Connect's pricing is high compared to other products.
What is your primary use case for IBM App Connect?
I have been using IBM App Connect for application integration.
What do you like most about WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
WSO2's analytics capability is good, considering the ELC support they provide.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
The product has reasonable and competitive pricing for enterprise customers. It is expensive for small businesses especially. They are using the open-source solution, and they find it expensive sin...
What needs improvement with WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
The main issue with the product is pricing. It uses core-based pricing for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and API Manager. It would be best if you had APIM by default. It provides many connectors for e...
 

Also Known As

IBM Cast Iron
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

United Way of Allegheny County, Saint-Gobain CPS, Ricoh, SunTrust Banks Inc.
West
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM App Connect vs. WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and other solutions. Updated: May 2023.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.