We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker 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."Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."
"The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is the ability to facilitate communication with legacy systems, offering a multitude of great capabilities. For example, if there is a mainframe system in place with a web service serving as the front end. In that case, the solution enables efficient protocol transformations to convert all request payloads into a format that the legacy systems can accept, rendering the integration and transformation processes seamless and highly effective."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"The solution has good integration."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces."
"The stability is good."
"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."
"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."
"Most of the work in our organization can be more easily done using the tool."
"It integrates well with various servers."
"What I found most valuable in webMethods Integration Server is that it's a strong ESB. It also has strong API modules and portals."
"webMethods Integration Server is an easy-to-use solution and does not require a lot of coding."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"One area that needs improvement is the version upgrade process. Many customers I've worked with encounter challenges when transitioning from their current version, such as x or 9, to a newer version. The process is not smooth, and they must shift their entire website."
"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."
"The product needs to be improved in a few ways. First, they need to stabilize the components of the whole platform across versions. Also, they should stop replacing old components with brand new ones and, rather, improve by evolution."
"It would be nice if they had a change management system offering. We built our own deployer application because the one built into webMethods couldn't enforce change management rules. Integration into a change management system, along with the version control system, would be a good offering; it's something that they're lacking."
"This solution could be improved by offering subscription based licensing."
"Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area."
"Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial."
"We got the product via a reseller, and the support from the reseller has been less than desirable."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 8th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 11 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Message Broker writes "For new applications that are being onboarded, we engage this tool so the data can flow as required but there's some lag in the GUI". 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 WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway, IBM BPM and Red Hat Fuse, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and SAP Process Orchestration. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker 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.
