No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

IBM WebSphere Application Server vs Squid Proxy Cache Server 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 WebSphere Application S...
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Application Server (5th)
Squid Proxy Cache Server
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
9th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.0
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Application Server is 4.8%, down from 11.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Squid Proxy Cache Server is 0.0%. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Infrastructure Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM WebSphere Application Server4.8%
Squid Proxy Cache Server0.0%
Other95.2%
Application Infrastructure
 

Featured Reviews

CF
Senior Manager, MW & DB Automation at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Has worked seamlessly in complex clustered environments and supports long-term development efforts
IBM WebSphere Application Server is currently at version 9.0.5.23. In recent months, they released fix 23, as they periodically release fixes. Previously, they frequently increased versions, but now they maintain 9.0.5 with different releases. It's based on Java J2EE 7 and Java SDK 1.8. Oracle announced that 2030 will be the last year when Java SDK 1.8 will be supported. Oracle currently deploys Java 2.x in parallel, with the latest being version 25. The future of IBM WebSphere Application Server remains uncertain since it's based on Java 1.8 and Java 7. I haven't found any white papers or official documentation from IBM outlining their trajectory post-2030.
Mayashankar Mishra - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner For Data Center Operations Dns Cache at Proximus S.A.
Caching and reverse proxy have boosted performance and improved secure web and mail access
I think Squid Proxy Cache Server can be improved by having a nice front-end, one similar to Blue Coat for access management, view management, and direct configuration instead of doing it all through the CLI. It's best to have everything done through the GUI, which is what I think can improve the product. I don't want to implement third-party GUIs on Squid Proxy Cache Server. So that's what would be on my wish list—that Squid Proxy Cache Server by itself provides a GUI, which will give more confidence to users. I haven't actually used AI with Squid Proxy Cache Server, but I think it might be very interesting to have the AI capability built-in. However, I do think we need some GPU or something to boost the performance on Squid Proxy Cache Server as natively running. I think we need to add some GPU cards so that it works more natively with AI. I don't have experience using AI features yet, but I think it would be great if it could do some live scanning of the websites that are getting blocked on a daily basis and perform some sampling analysis. Especially in the case of reverse proxy, if there are any attacks happening, it would be beneficial if it scrapes through its own log files and provides some nice dashboards showing where the attacks are coming from. That would be really great to have as a handy troubleshooting tool. One more feature I would ask for is if AI can provide the best possible configuration and do a review of Squid Proxy Cache Server just to make sure that no other ports or anything by default are missed in configuration. It would also be great if the proxy server acts as a load balancer in a cluster mode that shares the cache, and the configuration is best set.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition."
"The only reason why we're currently using WebSphere is that the integration of the authentication with Azure is very quick. WebSphere has something that can immediately connect with Azure Active Directory."
"The solution has good performance."
"I would not compare WebSphere and WebLogic because both servers are really good."
"What's most valuable in IBM WebSphere Application Server is its resilience. When you use the solution, you know that after the communication has been done, there will be no doubt that the data has reached its destination."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is one of the best servers due to its stability and paid license."
"They offer good help to help resolve the issue."
"The thing about WebSphere, as opposed to other ones that I am aware of such as JBoss and Liberty, is that WebSphere has the most comprehensive scaffolding available to it."
"Squid Proxy Cache Server offers flexibility, ease of deployment, and scalability as its best features."
"The traffic reduction resulting from Squid Proxy Cache Server has improved productivity and brought measurable benefits to the company, as there were savings not only in bandwidth and costs, but also in staff idleness."
"Squid Proxy Cache Server positively impacts my organization because I can filter the internet content that users can access."
"Squid Proxy Cache Server has positively impacted my organization because, as I mentioned, I do not have to enable internet access for each and every machine."
"The best features that Squid Proxy Cache Server offers include a lot of caching functionality, which is the best part, and then it is the security."
"Before, we used Blue Coat Proxy, Cyberoam Proxy, Forcepoint, and other solutions, and the reason we switched to Squid Proxy Cache Server is cost, because those professional proxy solutions have huge yearly cost involvement, and currently with Squid Proxy Cache Server, we are using it at no cost."
"The overall main benefits I experienced from using Squid Proxy Cache Server are the ability to control employee web browsing."
"Squid Proxy Cache Server has positively impacted my organization over the past 10 plus years by helping resolve any issues that occurred without major outages."
 

Cons

"Sometimes, I feel WebSphere runs a bit slow. It might be loading unnecessary libraries, impacting its performance compared to other application servers."
"The main issue we faced was its limited compatibility with non-Java technologies, which can result in difficulty detecting potential bugs and requiring additional integration efforts."
"The future of IBM WebSphere Application Server remains uncertain since it's based on Java 1.8 and Java 7."
"The solution could improve the integration."
"WebSphere is very cumbersome and not user-friendly. It used to have its own JVM, which presented challenges such as different architecture and memory leaks."
"The solution is very expensive compared to an open-source stack."
"Room for improvement would only be in the licensing. As with all IBM products the licensing can be complex and expensive."
"Stability is frustrating. It goes down after a specific number of user connections."
"As of right now, Squid Proxy Cache Server does not have this sort of security, so I would like to see better security in Squid Proxy Cache Server."
"I would rate it ten if we had a dashboard or visible interface with Squid Proxy Cache Server."
"Squid Proxy Cache Server could be improved by covering more aspects, having more updates, and providing a more up-to-date version of lists and logs that I can distribute to other places, thereby making its monitoring more complete."
"Squid Proxy Cache Server can be improved by enhancing the quality of use of web resources."
"The configuration of Squid Proxy Cache Server was somewhat difficult for someone new to the product."
"In terms of how Squid Proxy Cache Server can be improved, I believe that a few more details regarding how information is stored in the request-response cycle can be enhanced, especially in hit scenarios, and a few of the security architecture tools can also be improved."
"I do not think we should inherently trust the accuracy of Squid Proxy Cache Server when it comes to traffic content, security filtering, and logging without additional verification layers."
"I believe Squid Proxy Cache Server could also do more integrated authentication control, but also control over traffic acceptance, allowing traffic upon filling out a form showing what the need is for accessing that content which does not fall within the company's policies."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If your application is just a web app that does not need to scale big, you can obtain a single core license of WAS Express edition, which has almost the same features with limited processing cores. If you manage a very big application farm (i.e. need to run 10 or more WAS servers) it is better to get IBM WAS Hypervisor Edition."
"It is very expensive."
"When you purchase Maximo, you get WebSphere for free."
"We used to pay about $100,000-$120,000 US or somewhere around there. That was a bit cost-prohibitive for us to continue."
"There is an Eclipse Plugin provided by IBM, so no need to buy IBM Rational Application Developer or Rational Software Architect tools."
"The price of this product is higher than that of competitors."
"It costs more than some of the others, but, you get what you pay for."
"Room for improvement would only be in the licensing. As with all IBM products the licensing can be complex and expensive. Bargain well and try to get as much discount as possible. Discounts of 85% are possible. Without the discount, I think the product is overrated."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Construction Company
23%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Application Server?
At Royal Bank, which is a major IBM customer with mainframes and numerous IBM products, they have a specific agreement regarding pricing. The pricing structure for large enterprise customers differ...
What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Application Server?
IBM WebSphere Application Server is currently at version 9.0.5.23. In recent months, they released fix 23, as they periodically release fixes. Previously, they frequently increased versions, but no...
What is your primary use case for IBM WebSphere Application Server?
I was part of an application where I integrated IBM WebSphere Application Server with Node.js and Blue Prism. I did a lot of REST applications because at my core, I'm a developer. Currently, I'm an...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Squid Proxy Cache Server?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing involves using an open-source Squid Proxy product, so the costs are low because it is open-source software.
What needs improvement with Squid Proxy Cache Server?
I believe that Squid Proxy Cache Server could see improvements with updates to incorporate the latest kernel. Nowadays, there are many competitors available, but I want to emphasize that Squid Prox...
What is your primary use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server?
My main use case for Squid Proxy Cache Server is that it's an open source application implementation, with a frontend being an Apache server and a backend using MySQL databases. Squid Proxy Cache S...
 

Also Known As

WebSphere Application Server
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TalkTalk, Property management group, E.SUN Bank, Ohio National Financial Services, Aviarc, Cincom Systems, FJA-US, D+H, Staples, Michigan Municipal League
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Squid Proxy Cache Server and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.