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

Kong Gateway Enterprise vs Pipedream comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 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

Kong Gateway Enterprise
Ranking in API Management
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Pipedream
Ranking in API Management
40th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the API Management category, the mindshare of Kong Gateway Enterprise is 4.6%, down from 6.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pipedream is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Kong Gateway Enterprise4.6%
Pipedream0.5%
Other94.9%
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

ES
Enterprise Architect at El Al
Seamless integration and efficient security boost API management capabilities
More plugins for additional integrations would be helpful and openness for traditional development languages, such as .NET, because many enterprises are looking for .NET solutions or incorporating with .NET solutions. I mostly missed local resellers or partners that we could use within our enterprise, because it was difficult for some tech personnel to work with remote tech support.
FrankHo - PeerSpot reviewer
Analyst at MSXI
A tool that ensures that its users see a return on investment from its use
The UI and the fact that the product is not easy to use are areas with shortcomings where improvements are required. Documentation isn't available for everything in the solution, so you may have to figure out a lot of things by yourself. Pipedream is easy to use for someone with tech skills or someone new who is trying to learn how to code. Though it is user-friendly for people with tech skills, it is not at all user-friendly for people who do not have any tech skills. The user interface of Pipedream is very simple compared to the user interfaces of some other products like monday.com or Asana. Asana and monday.com have visually appealing user interfaces. The user interface of Pipedream is not visually appealing at all. The aforementioned details need to be considered for improvement in the solution. I just wish there was a little bit more documentation on how everything worked when it came to deployment since I was a fairly new employee at the company at that time. Sometimes, the workflow wouldn't work fine in Pipedream, and I had to check it myself for errors. Finding the errors in Pipedream is hard to find. I think it would be good if Pipedream had the ability to send an email to notify you that there is an error with the code instead of having to go back in and then look every day or every hour if there was an error in the code.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Kong Enterprise comes with some ready plug-ins, which is very good for the customers."
"The clients that we have already deployed are happy with it."
"The features of Kong are plugin-based network services, and it enables us to include our security policy when creating customers."
"In our buying companies' perspective, it was easier and more unique to use compared to other platforms."
"Kong Gateway helped to improve performance. It's good enough for our users."
"Kong Enterprise has excellent plugin support."
"The solution's technical support is good and fast in terms of responsiveness and problem-solving skills."
"Kong's most valuable features are its lightweight performance when handling millions of requests and the ability to write custom plugins to enhance security, such as end-to-end encryption, even in the open-source version."
"The most valuable feature of Pipedream is the ability to use Python code in general."
"The solution enables users to integrate several things."
"The most valuable features of Pipedream are the prebuilt integrations that require no coding."
"It is a developer-friendly platform that allows writing custom scripts."
 

Cons

"Kong Enterprise can improve the customization to be able to do the integration properly."
"The ease of billing is lost when Kong is not available directly on the Azure marketplace. This is one area where they can improve."
"We are facing issues with the solution's features like reports and traffic analysis."
"Kong Enterprise needs to improve its pricing, which starts at hundreds of thousands of dollars. Pricing should be based on API usage rather than monthly. It should improve its documentation as well."
"More plugins for additional integrations would be helpful and openness for traditional development languages, such as .NET, because many enterprises are looking for .NET solutions or incorporating with .NET solutions."
"Because it is open-source, it should be less expensive than others."
"Kong is meant for north-south communications, so it will be interesting to see what solutions they can come up with in the realms of east-west communications, service-to-service communications, and Zero Trust architecture."
"The OS upgrades are not as frequent as they should be and they are bulky."
"There is a potential area for improvement in handling loop operations over items."
"Documentation isn't available for everything in the solution, so you may have to figure out a lot of things by yourself."
"They should give more information about trigger failure."
"We faced some server timeouts."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Basically, my company uses the tool's open-source version."
"There are many factors that influence the price of Kong Enterprise, such as scale, licenses, and usage."
"The licensing is expensive."
"The product is reasonably priced because it goes by the SaaS model."
"Kong Enterprise's pricing is at par compared to the other technologies."
"There is a need to pay towards the licensing charges...In some areas, the functionalities are available free of charge."
"The licensing fees are paid yearly."
"Kong Enterprise's pricing is reasonable for our company size."
"Price-wise, for a company, it is a nice product, but for personal use, it is not very beneficial."
"The product price is fair and inexpensive than one of the competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Large Enterprise20
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How does Kong Enterprise compare with Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager?
The Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager was designed with its users in mind. Though it is a reasonably complex piece of software, it is easy to install and upgrade. While there are different things that ...
What needs improvement with Kong Enterprise?
Bringing in additional features to Kong Gateway Enterprise would not necessarily help it. Improving the existing features, increasing security, and adding robustness would be more beneficial. The f...
What is your primary use case for Kong Enterprise?
Our primary use cases for Kong Gateway Enterprise are modernizations, migrations, and digitalizations of financial institutions. These are the primary areas we are looking for.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cargill, Zillow, Ferrari, WeWork, Healthcare.gov, Yahoo! Japan, Giphy, SkyScanner
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Kong Gateway Enterprise vs. Pipedream and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.