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

Kiteworks vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

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

Kiteworks
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Content Management (14th), Email Security (27th), Content Collaboration Platforms (14th), Secure Email Gateway (SEG) (11th)
webMethods.io
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), API Management (10th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of Kiteworks is 10.7%, up from 5.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.2%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

Sukkanta Banerjee - PeerSpot reviewer
Two-factor authentication and .ZIP format make large file transfers very secure
The most valuable feature is the ability to send a large file of 30 GB in size and more. In Outlook and other email applications, you cannot send files that are larger than 20 MB. But with Kiteworks, 30 GB is transferable by default and, with the proper approval, a file of up to 100 GB can be sent. It makes file transfer very easy and smooth. Also, only the .ZIP format is supported because it is a very secure mode of file transfer, and that is why it is recommended. It also has built-in antivirus, so if it detects any malware it will quarantine the file and it won't be delivered. This is really important to keep the service up and running in a proper and secure manner. With people working from home, the data needs to be checked to see what kind of data is being sent. It has a two-factor authentication mechanism. For example, if a person with a particular domain is using Kiteworks and sends a file to a party outside of his domain, that external party has to go through two-factor authentication. The receiver gets a link that takes them to the setup of a temporary account, which will be valid for three days. The recipient will also receive a customized password separately. Only after all these steps will they be able to access the file. That access is only available to a person with the mail ID to which the file was sent. In addition, admins can see who is sending sensitive content, what that content is, and to whom it is being sent, and can track emails. One week of good training will give a user complete knowledge for using the solution. The system is very easy to use. You just click on "Compose," attach a file, and send it. It's very easy compared to Outlook or Teams. It's quite simple, even for someone logging in for the first time. It is very smooth and easy to send files.
Michele Illiano - PeerSpot reviewer
Can function as an ESB along with the core product, with decent integration of message protocols
I have noticed that webMethods ActiveTransfer has had problems when handling large files. For example, when we receive (and perform operations on) files that are larger than about 16 MB, the software starts losing performance. This is why, for most customers who have to deal with big files, I suggest that they use a product other than ActiveTransfer. I would like to note that this problem mainly concerns large files that undergo extra operations, such assigning, unassigning, or file translation. When these operations take place on large files, ActiveTransfer will use up a lot of resources. Within the product itself, I also believe that there is room for improvement in terms of optimization when it comes to general performance. I suspect that the issues underlying poor optimization are because it is all developed in Java. That is, all the objects and functions that are used need to be better organized, especially when it comes to big files but also overall. webMethods ActiveTransfer was born as an ESB to handle messages, and these messages were typically very short, i.e. small in size. A message is data that you have to send to an application, where it must be received in real-time and possibly processed or acknowledged elsewhere in the system as well. So, because it was initially designed for small messages, it struggles with performance when presented with very large files. All this to say, I suggest that they have an engineer reevaluate the architecture of the product in order to consider cases where large files are sent, and not only small ones. As for new features, compared to other products in the market, I think Software AG should be more up to date when it comes to extra protocol support, especially those protocols that other solutions have included in their products by default. Whenever we need to add an unsupported protocol, we have to go through the effort of custom development in order to work with it. Also, all the banks are obligated to migrate to the new standards, and big companies are all handling translations and operating their libraries with the new protocol formats. But webMethods ActiveTransfer doesn't seem to be keeping up with this evolution. Thus, they should aim to be more compliant in future, along the lines of their competitors such as IBM and Primeur.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable aspect of Kiteworks is undoubtedly the private content network. This feature is particularly beneficial for us. Furthermore, it serves as a centralized platform that enables us to track and manage our information exchange."
"I like Kiteworks or Accellion because it's continuously upgraded. I also know that it probably works with a lot of clients."
"The best part of this solution is that we can generate multiple reports about how the data is transferred and about user information or IP."
"The top two features are the two-factor authentication, which is pretty good. It's easily understood by the users. And their API is rather robust. We have numerous integrations that work off the API."
"The solution removes the limitations with file attachment size that is found with regular email."
"I can identify from which region our users are uploading or downloading files."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to send a large file of 30 GB in size and more. In Outlook and other email applications, you cannot send files that are larger than 20 MB. But with Kiteworks, 30 GB is transferable by default and, with the proper approval, a file of up to 100 GB can be sent. It makes file transfer very easy and smooth."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to allow end-users to manage their own information and data with minimal administration. That's the best feature from my perspective."
"​Broker and UM are the best features."
"The performance is good."
"I like the tool's scalability."
"Operationally, I consider the solution to be quite good."
"They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform."
"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."
"Some of the key features are the integration platform, query mechanism, message handling within the bus, and the rules engine. We've had a really good experience with webMethods Integration Server."
"The connectivity that the tool provides, along with the functionalities needed for our company's business, are some of the beneficial aspects of the product."
 

Cons

"It would be nice if Kiteworks could provide a free version of the platform so that it could be used for a certain number of file transfers. We could be charged a fee if we exceeded the number of allotted file transfers."
"In my experience, their technical support can be a little slow."
"We have experienced a few hiccups and bugs when using the admin console and from a user perspective."
"I noticed the Kiteworks login UI is very basic, lacking customization. Allowing more HTML tags to add hyperlinks or user-friendly information on the home page would be very useful."
"I would like to see immediate releases of fixes because now it takes at least a week. If that time span can be reduced to one day or two days, that would be very helpful for users so that things are sorted and transactions work smoothly."
"Kiteworks could benefit from enhancing the proposal knowledge base section, specifically regarding the type of work involved. Currently, the knowledge base seems insufficiently dedicated to this topic, making it challenging for new users to access the relevant administrative law. Improving the visual aids and providing clearer explanations could alleviate this issue."
"It could be more stable. In the next release, it would be better if it was more stable with improved performance."
"Perhaps there could be a notification to users about their bandwidth or network packet loss."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"​Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
"Business monitoring (BAM) needs improvement because the analytics and prediction module very often has performance problems."
"Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial."
"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."
"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."
"I would like the solution to provide bi-weekly updates."
"The certifications and learning resources are not exposed openly enough. For instance, they have a trial version which comes with only a few basic features, and I think that community-wise they need to offer more free or open spaces where developers can feel encouraged to experiment."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They changed it midstream. We were being charged a certain flat rate for SFTP traffic. For whatever reason, at the beginning of the year, our pricing changed, and we are now being charged more for using a feature of the product than we were when we first bought it. That has been our experience with billing. It turned out to be more expensive than when we started with it."
"The license management is changing and confusing. If I could make one change to it, it would be better license management through the API."
"The price of Kiteworks is reasonable."
"It is not really expensive. I mean, to me it's obviously expensive, but it's worth it."
"The solution is very expensive because we are buying with Malaysian Ringgit and it's sold in US dollars."
"I believe it's a little costly, but given the faith that we put into it from a security perspective to maintain the integrity of our patient information that is being transferred through this system, that's a small price to pay. So, on the surface, it might look like a lot of money, but depending on the need for security, which is where we feel it shines, it's okay price-wise."
"Always plan five years ahead and don’t jeopardize the quality of your project by dropping items from the bill of materials."
"Most of my clients would like the price of the solution to be reduced."
"webMethods Integration Server is expensive, and there's no fixed price on it because it has a point pricing model. You can negotiate, which makes it interesting."
"It is worth the cost."
"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."
"The solution's development license is free for three to six months. We have to pay for other things."
"The solution’s pricing is too high."
"Some of the licensing is "component-ized," which is confusing to new users/customers."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is Kiteworks?
Kiteworks is a secured file sharing platform that enables users to collaborate with different parties across a robust offering of secured protected channels. Users have the option of virtual privat...
What do you like most about Kiteworks?
The benefits that Kiteworks has provided to its customers in terms of data sovereignty.
What needs improvement with Kiteworks?
I'm not a network expert, however, there must be some room for improvement. Perhaps there could be a notification to users about their bandwidth or network packet loss. If users receive such notifi...
What do you like most about Built.io Flow?
The tool helps us to streamline data integration. Its BPM is very strong and powerful. The solution helps us manage digital transformation.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Built.io Flow?
webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them.
What needs improvement with Built.io Flow?
webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Accellion
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

United States Securities and Exchange Commission, National Health Service, Husch Blackwell LLP, NYC Health + Hospitals, Viatris, MITRE Corporation, Chubb, Kraft Heinz, KPMG, Kohler, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Purdue Pharma, AVL
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Kiteworks vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.