We performed a comparison between IBM Cloud Pak for Integration and SnapLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"Cloud Pak for Integration is definitely scalable. That is the most important criteria."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable aspect of the Cloud Pak, in general, is the flexibility that you have to use the product."
"The connection with SOAP is the best feature."
"The solution could improve its API management."
"You can use other languages, such as Python, and easily connect to other systems."
"SnapLogice is a low-code development tool."
"It is a scalable solution."
"SnapLogic is more user-friendly than Boomi in terms of debugging. You can move the mouse to a place, and it will record and show the data easily."
"The API architecture makes it easy for orchestration."
"I found SnapLogic valuable and what I found most valuable about it was its ETL feature. I also found its automation feature valuable. It can be used for automating manual activities. It can be used as a middleware for certain transactional data processing and minimal datasets and ETL activities."
"Its queuing and messaging features need improvement."
"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."
"The pricing can be improved."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"The support is the most important improvement they could make."
"One of the areas for improvement in SnapLogic is that the connectors for some of the applications should be more available in terms of testing in the dev environment. Another area for improvement is that the logging should be standardized, for example, the integration with an ELK stack should be required out-of-the-box, so you can ship the log and have it in the ELK stack. There should be integration with ELK stack for the log shipping."
"I don't think the support has better knowledge about technologies and tool support. There were lots of times when we had an issue, and it took me quite a long time to explain the problem. I feel like some of the support staff don't know their product well."
"We'd like zero downtime in the future."
"Ultra Pipelines provides real-time ingestion but it needs some adjustment."
"What could be improved in SnapLogic is that it was not capable in terms of processing a large number of datasets, but at that point, SnapLogic was evolving. It didn't give a lot of Snaps. I heard recently there are a lot of Snaps getting added and the solution was being enhanced, particularly to connect different data sources. When I was working with SnapLogic six months to one year back, I faced the issue of it not being capable of handling a huge volume of datasets or didn't have much of Snaps, and that was the drawback. If there is any large number of data sets, that's based on or depends on your configuration. If it is a huge volume of data, other traditional ETL tools such as Informatica and Talend can process millions and billions of records, while in SnapLogic, the Snaplex fails or it returns an error in terms of processing that huge volume of data. Informatica, Talend, or any other ETL tool can run for hours in terms of jobs, while SnapLogic jobs fail when the threshold is reached. SnapLogic isn't able to withstand processing, but I don't know if that's still an issue at present, because the solution is getting enhanced and it's been more than six months to one year since I last worked with SnapLogic. There are now a lot of Snaps getting added to the solution, and if it can overcome the limitations I mentioned, SnapLogic could be the go-to tool because currently, it's not being used as much in organizations. It's being used comparatively less compared to other retail tools."
"We'd like there to be more ways for users to get more comfortable and have more experience with the solution to make it easier to use."
"They should expand in terms of features for SaaS-based market requirements in different sectors."
More IBM Cloud Pak for Integration Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is ranked 14th in Cloud Data Integration with 4 reviews while SnapLogic is ranked 6th in Cloud Data Integration with 20 reviews. IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is rated 8.6, while SnapLogic is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Cloud Pak for Integration writes "A hybrid integration platform that applies the functionality of closed-loop AI automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SnapLogic writes "Easy to set up, easy to use, and is low-code". IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is most compared with IBM App Connect, IBM API Connect, IBM DataPower Gateway, Microsoft Azure API Management and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, whereas SnapLogic is most compared with Azure Data Factory, AWS Glue, IBM InfoSphere DataStage, Informatica Cloud Data Integration and SSIS. See our IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs. SnapLogic report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud 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.
