We performed a comparison between IBM Integration Bus and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."This solution is very reliable and it is easy to learn."
"I really like SQL integration nodes, HTTP nodes, event handling, event monitoring, the performance of the solution."
"The integration with other tools is excellent. It integrates well with batch issues."
"The interface is quite stable."
"It's easy to develop things, and it's easy to handle."
"It has the ability to be deployed without rewriting the code."
"The solution offers good performance and is stable."
"It is one of the most stable products which I have seen in the market."
"It's a visual tool, so our transformations can be quickly implemented without a lot of fuss. The fact that we have an easy way to expose REST services is also very interesting. It offers the possibility to connect over GMS to synchronize message brokers."
"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."
"We can arrange data caching and look at the solid state. Also, the API gateway is a very good component that can handle relevant cachings and integrations, as well as and also load permitting."
"It is a bundled product stack for A2A and B2B usage. It is one of the best products which I have used during my integration career."
"The MFT component of webMethods, for example, is easy to set up and convenient to use. It handles files very efficiently and it is easy to automate tasks with complex schedules. Monitoring is centralized to MWS which can be used to monitor other products as well (Trading Networks, BPM, MFT, etc.)"
"We needed a tool that was able to orchestrate and help us configure our APIs so that we could maintain and see the heartbeat, traffic, trends, etc."
"They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform."
"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."
"The user interface could be improved in a future release."
"This solution would benefit from improvements to the configuration interface."
"IBM doesn't really have a very strong community surrounding the product. Most of its direct competitors are open source solutions, and those have an excellent and well-developed community around the tech to help users navigate the ins and outs of the product. IBM is lacking in this area."
"Performance can be an issue sometimes. The tool occasionally crashes due to memory-related problems. We've reported these issues to IBM, and they are actively working on improving the tooling experience."
"To scale virtically, is difficult."
"Current aggregation implementation should be deprecated. MQ independent, as well as an intuitive solution, should be proposed."
"In terms of improvement, the UI should be more user-friendly."
"The version of the technology and current knowledge is a bit outdated."
"Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area."
"wM SAP Adapter User Guide - Example, like Message Broker setup was unclear, leading to issues during Testing and we had refer the internet forums to understand that there is a Message Broker Cleanup utility and that needs to be setup as well."
"When migration happens from the one release to an upgraded release from Software AG, many of the existing services are deprecated and developers have to put in effort testing and redeveloping some of the services. It would be better that upgrade releases took care to support the lower-level versions of webMethods."
"Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial."
"Forced migration from MessageBroker to Universal Messaging requires large scale reimplementation for JMS."
"The deployment should be simplified."
"I would like to see the price improve."
"In terms of improvement, it would be better if it adapted quicker to open standards. It took a while for API specification before the last version was available. The spec of version two was rather quick."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Integration Bus is ranked 1st in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 63 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. IBM Integration Bus is rated 8.0, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Integration Bus writes "Scalable solution with efficient integration features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". IBM Integration Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM WebSphere Message Broker, Oracle Service Bus, IBM DataPower Gateway and Red Hat Fuse, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks, Boomi AtomSphere Integration and Oracle Service Bus. See our IBM Integration Bus vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) 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.