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

IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs Kong Gateway Enterprise comparison

IBM and Kong are both solutions in the API Management category. IBM is ranked #24 with an average rating of 8.5, while Kong is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.6. IBM holds a 0.5% mindshare in APIM, compared to Kong’s 6.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of Kong users who would recommend it.
IBM Cloud Pak for Integration
Read 5 IBM Cloud Pak for Integration reviews
  • 755 Views
  • 553 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
Kong Gateway Enterprise
Read 24 Kong Gateway Enterprise reviews
  • 8,512 Views
  • 6,571 Comparison Views
92% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Kong Gateway Enterprise and IBM Cloud Pak for Integration compete in the API management and integration space. Kong Gateway Enterprise stands out in pricing and support, whereas IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is notable for its extensive features, suggesting its higher cost is worthwhile.

Features: Kong Gateway Enterprise provides high-performance API gateway capabilities, excellent scalability, and seamless integration with multiple platforms. IBM Cloud Pak for Integration offers robust integration features, including comprehensive data integration, AI-driven automation, and multi-cloud flexibility.

Room for Improvement: Kong Gateway Enterprise could enhance its integration capabilities to compete with more comprehensive solutions, improve its AI-driven functionalities, and support even broader platform agnosticity. IBM Cloud Pak for Integration may benefit from simplifying its deployment model, reducing operational complexity, and offering more cost-effective options for smaller businesses.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kong Gateway Enterprise is praised for its straightforward deployment and configuration, coupled with responsive customer service. IBM Cloud Pak for Integration, despite its complex deployment model, provides detailed documentation and strong customer support, catering well to organizations with intricate environments.

Pricing and ROI: Kong Gateway Enterprise is cost-effective, with attractive ROI prospects, suitable for budget-conscious organizations. IBM Cloud Pak for Integration, while involving higher upfront costs, promises long-term ROI with its expansive features and scalability, making it ideal for strategic investments.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs. Kong Gateway Enterprise Report (Updated: April 2025).
Buyer's Guide
IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs. Kong Gateway Enterprise
April 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 850,028 peers since 2012

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 Cloud Pak for Integration
Ranking in API Management
24th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (15th)
Kong Gateway Enterprise
Ranking in API Management
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the API Management category, the mindshare of IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is 0.5%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kong Gateway Enterprise is 6.7%, up from 6.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

Neelima Golla - PeerSpot reviewer
A hybrid integration platform that applies the functionality of closed-loop AI automation
I recommend using it because, in today's context, the cloud plays a significant role. Within the same user interface, you can develop applications and manage multiple applications, making it a more user-friendly option. Moreover, you can explore various other technologies while deploying on the cloud, broadening your knowledge of cloud technologies. In my case, the transition led to my learning of Kubernetes, enabling multi-scaling and expanding my technical skills. It was a valuable experience, and I had the opportunity to learn many new things during the migration process. I can easily rate it an eight or nine out of ten.
Read full review
AmitKanodia - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides role-based access control and can be easily customized with Lua script
Kong is meant for north-south communications, so it will be interesting to see what solutions they can come up with in the realms of east-west communications, service-to-service communications, and Zero Trust architecture. I believe that if they can provide for these areas, then they will be able to solve the overall integration and security concerns for microservices architecture in general.
Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Redirection is a key feature. It helps in managing multiple microservices by centralizing control and access."
"The most preferable aspect would be the elimination of the command, which was a significant improvement. In the past, it was a challenge, but now we can proceed smoothly with the implementation of our policies and everything is managed through JCP. It's still among the positive aspects, and it's a valuable feature."
"The most valuable aspect of the Cloud Pak, in general, is the flexibility that you have to use the product."
"It is a stable solution."
"Cloud Pak for Integration is definitely scalable. That is the most important criteria."
"The tool's feature that I find most beneficial is rate limiting. In our usage, especially in the financial sector, we prioritize limiting API usage. This is crucial because we provide APIs to other companies and must ensure they adhere to their allocated usage limits. Without rate limiting, there's a risk of excessive usage, which could result in significant costs."
"Kong enterprise has significantly enhanced our ability to manage and secure our Microservices. Its most valuable feature is monitoring."
"The solution's technical support is good and fast in terms of responsiveness and problem-solving skills."
"The most valuable feature of Kong Enterprise is its capability to integrate with various security tools."
"It boasts remarkable speed and stability, and these qualities, particularly the gateway's resilience, are standout features for me."
"We use the solution for load-balancing, caching, and rate-limiting APIs."
"The solution provides good performance."
"In terms of stability, the tool's team has made some good efforts, and my company is very happy with the product's approach."
More Kong Gateway Enterprise pros
 

Cons

"The pricing can be improved."
"Setting up Cloud Pak for Integration is relatively complex. It's not as easy because it has not yet been fully integrated. You still have some products that are still not containerized, so you still have to run them on a dedicated VM."
"Enterprise bots are needed to balance products like Kafka and Confluent."
"Its queuing and messaging features need improvement."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"Kong Enterprise can improve the customization to be able to do the integration properly."
"The tool needs improvement in UX."
"Kong is meant for north-south communications, so it will be interesting to see what solutions they can come up with in the realms of east-west communications, service-to-service communications, and Zero Trust architecture. I believe that if they can provide for these areas, then they will be able to solve the overall integration and security concerns for microservices architecture in general."
"The main challenge, in my opinion, is the price. It's difficult to convince our management to approve the budget to purchase it from our vendor. There are no technical problems."
"The open-source version of Kong does not support a dashboard, which would be very helpful."
"The developer portal needs to be improved."
"Kong Enterprise needs to improve its pricing, which starts at hundreds of thousands of dollars. Pricing should be based on API usage rather than monthly. It should improve its documentation as well."
"The technical support team's response time needs to be improved."
More Kong Gateway Enterprise cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is an expensive solution."
"The solution's pricing model is very flexible."
"There are many factors that influence the price of Kong Enterprise, such as scale, licenses, and usage."
"I don't have any information on licensing costs currently."
"Basically, my company uses the tool's open-source version."
"There is a need to pay towards the licensing charges...In some areas, the functionalities are available free of charge."
"The licensing fees are paid yearly."
"Kong Enterprise's pricing is reasonable for our company size."
"Kong Enterprise is cheaper than Apigee. I rate its pricing as four out of ten."
"It's expensive in Thailand (10 million baht, in Thai currency)."
More Kong Gateway Enterprise pricing and cost advice
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
8%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Cloud Pak for Integration?
The most preferable aspect would be the elimination of the command, which was a significant improvement. In the past, it was a challenge, but now we can proceed smoothly with the implementation of ...
See all answers
What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Pak for Integration?
Enterprise bots are needed to balance products like Kafka and Confluent.
See all answers
What is your primary use case for IBM Cloud Pak for Integration?
It manages APIs and integrates microservices at the enterprise level. It offers a range of capabilities for handling APIs, microservices, and various integration needs. The platform supports thousa...
See all answers
How does Kong Enterprise compare with Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager?
The Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager was designed with its users in mind. Though it is a reasonably complex piece of software, it is easy to install and upgrade. While there are different things that ...
See all answers
What do you like most about Kong Enterprise?
The tool's feature that I find most beneficial is rate limiting. In our usage, especially in the financial sector, we prioritize limiting API usage. This is crucial because we provide APIs to other...
See all answers
What needs improvement with Kong Enterprise?
The open-source version of Kong does not support a dashboard, which would be very helpful. We use an open-source tool called Konga for basic dashboard needs, but it lacks support. It would be bette...
See all answers
 

Comparisons

IBM App Connect vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration Logo
IBM App Connect vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration
Compared 45% of the time
IBM API Connect vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration Logo
IBM API Connect vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration
Compared 15% of the time
IBM DataPower Gateway vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration Logo
IBM DataPower Gateway vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration
Compared 7% of the time
IBM InfoSphere DataStage vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration Logo
IBM InfoSphere DataStage vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration
Compared 7% of the time
AWS Glue vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration Logo
AWS Glue vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration
Compared 6% of the time
More IBM Cloud Pak for Integration Competitors
Microsoft Azure API Management vs Kong Gateway Enterprise Logo
Microsoft Azure API Management vs Kong Gateway Enterprise
Compared 12% of the time
WSO2 API Manager vs Kong Gateway Enterprise Logo
WSO2 API Manager vs Kong Gateway Enterprise
Compared 12% of the time
Apigee vs Kong Gateway Enterprise Logo
Apigee vs Kong Gateway Enterprise
Compared 11% of the time
Kong Konnect vs Kong Gateway Enterprise Logo
Kong Konnect vs Kong Gateway Enterprise
Compared 10% of the time
Amazon API Gateway vs Kong Gateway Enterprise Logo
Amazon API Gateway vs Kong Gateway Enterprise
Compared 7% of the time
More Kong Gateway Enterprise Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
API Management
April 2025
IBM Cloud Pak for Integration reportDownload IBM Cloud Pak for Integration product report
Buyer's Guide
Kong Gateway Enterprise
April 2025
Kong Gateway Enterprise reportDownload Kong Gateway Enterprise product report
 

Overview

IBM Cloud Pak for Integration gives you complete, flexible integration using capabilities you need to move at today's speed of business, including the tools to help you achieve your application modernization goals as part of your journey to the cloud.

IBM

Kong delivers a next generation API platform built for modern architectures. With a lightnight-fast, lightweight, and flexible core, Kong delivers sub-millisecond latency across all your services. Kong's is deployment-, vendor-, and pattern-agnostic, allowing you to run your services how you want, where you want, and with who you want - from baremetal to cloud, monolith to microservices, service mesh, and beyond.

Kong
 

Sample Customers

CVS Health Corporation
Cargill, Zillow, Ferrari, WeWork, Healthcare.gov, Yahoo! Japan, Giphy, SkyScanner
Buyer's Guide
IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs. Kong Gateway Enterprise
April 2025
Free Report: IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs. Kong Gateway Enterprise
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs. Kong Gateway Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs. Kong Gateway Enterprise 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.