We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Pak for Data and MuleSoft Composer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."One of Cloud Pak's best features is the Watson Knowledge Catalog, which helps you implement data governance."
"The most valuable features of IBM Cloud Pak for Data are the Watson Studio, where we can initiate more groups and write code. Additionally, Watson Machine Learning is available with many other services, such as APIs which you can plug the machine learning models."
"The most valuable features are data virtualization and reporting."
"DataStage allows me to connect to different data sources."
"You can model the data there, connect the data models with the business processes and create data lineage processes."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Cloud Pak for Data is the Modeler flows. The ability to develop models using a graphical approach and the capability to connect to various sources, as well as the data virtualization capabilities, allow me to easily access and utilize data that is dispersed across different sources."
"What I found most helpful in IBM Cloud Pak for Data is containerization, which means it's easy to shift and leave in terms of moving to other clouds. That's an advantage of IBM Cloud Pak for Data."
"The way Composer organizes and manages integration processes is most beneficial. We can easily monitor what's running and what isn't and troubleshoot any data integration issues."
"The prebuilt connectors have saved our customers a lot of time and money."
"The product is easy to use. You don't need programming skills to use it."
"The advantage of using MuleSoft as part as the Salesforce ecosystem is that anything new they build is guaranteed to work with the new features that are coming from the other side."
"The tool depends on the control plane, an OpenShift container platform utilized as an orchestration layer...So, we have communicated this issue to IBM and asked if it is feasible to adapt the solution to work on a Kubernetes platform that we support."
"The solution's user experience is an area that has room for improvement."
"Cloud Pak would be improved with integration with cloud service providers like Cloudera."
"There is a solution that is part of IBM Cloud Pak for Data called Watson OpenScale. It is used to monitor the deployed models for the quality and fairness of the results. This is one area that needs a lot of improvement."
"One challenge I'm facing with IBM Cloud Pak for Data is native features have been decommissioned, such as XML input and output. Too many changes have been made, and my company has around one hundred thousand mappings, so my team has been putting more effort into alternative ways to do things. Another area for improvement in IBM Cloud Pak for Data is that it's more complicated to shift from on-premise to the cloud. Other vendors provide secure agents that easily connect with your existing setup. Still, with IBM Cloud Pak for Data, you have to perform connection migration steps, upgrade to the latest version, etc., which makes it more complicated, especially as my company has XML-based mappings. Still, the XML input and output capabilities of IBM Cloud Pak for Data have been discontinued, so I'd like IBM to bring that back."
"The technical support could be a little better."
"One thing that bugs me is how much infrastructure Cloud Pak requires for the initial deployment. It doesn't allow you to start small. The smallest permitted deployment is too big. It's a huge problem that prevents us from implementing the solution in many scenarios."
"The interface could improve because sometimes it becomes slow. Sometimes there is a delay between clicks when using the software, which can make the development process slow. It can take a few seconds to complete one action, and then a few more seconds to do the next one."
"MuleSoft Composer needs to improve its interface and scalability."
"One additional feature they could add might be something like regional prices. Since we're based in Brazil, we pay in dollars but earn in Brazilian Real."
"This solution could be improved by offering more integrations with other platforms."
"The technical support team's response time must be improved."
IBM Cloud Pak for Data is ranked 17th in Data Integration with 11 reviews while MuleSoft Composer is ranked 40th in Data Integration with 4 reviews. IBM Cloud Pak for Data is rated 8.0, while MuleSoft Composer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Pak for Data writes "A scalable data analytics and digital transformation tool that provides useful features and integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MuleSoft Composer writes "Handles a wide variety of data sources and efficiently organizes and manages integration processes". IBM Cloud Pak for Data is most compared with IBM InfoSphere DataStage, Azure Data Factory, Informatica Cloud Data Integration, Palantir Foundry and Denodo, whereas MuleSoft Composer is most compared with Mule Anypoint Platform, Workato, Celigo Integration Platform, Microsoft Azure Logic Apps and Zapier. See our IBM Cloud Pak for Data vs. MuleSoft Composer report.
See our list of best Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Data Integration 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.
