We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure API Management and webMethods API Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the developer portal, which has source code examples in various programming languages to help developers learn the API."
"The mediation and translation from SOAP to REST technology makes it possible to open up legacy systems that couldn't be opened before."
"The solution is quite stable. We have no issues with it. there have been no crashes and we haven't experienced bugs or glitches. It's been quite reliable."
"The solution is reliable and very stable."
"It is easy to use."
"Most of the features are valuable to me."
"The price is pretty reasonable for us."
"The integration with Azure Active Directory is a good security feature for authentication and authorization. There is multifactor authentication. You can also use all of the Azure AD features integrated with API Management."
"It's a good tool, and it has a stable messaging broker."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution for me has been the configuration-based UI. Once you get the hang of it, it enables you to easily develop an API. In addition, it has many in-built policies that are quite handy."
"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."
"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."
"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."
"The developer portal is a valuable feature."
"In the API gateway, there is a new feature that allows us to filter logs within a payload. This has been a useful feature."
"Within the new version, webMethods API Gateway gives us an end-to-end lifecycle from the creation of the API up into the development, deployment, and promotion into production/live. The current end-to-end lifecycle of the API gives us enough authority and governance of the API. We know what are currently live services, what is in the testing stage of development, and what version that has been commissioned. So, the full life cycle itself gives us full authority and governance of the API."
"An area for improvement in Microsoft Azure API Management is deployment, in particular, the deployment of versions in Oryx. The development to production instance isn't adequate for me and needs to be improved. Microsoft Azure API Management lacks automation, which is another area for improvement."
"The integration with other API gateways is where they might try to improve."
"Some of the DevOps stuff could be easier to work with. The migration paths are a little complicated, and moving code around could be more seamless. There should be less manual migration when several teams work together to publish code to the DevOps."
"I would like to see more security features become available."
"The product needs to introduce a developer portal."
"Sometimes when immediate support is required, it isn't available."
"The hybrid part could be improved because API Management is entirely cloud-based, but some of our resources are on-prem, so formatting is an issue. Our goal is dual implementation."
"The licensing tiers can be misleading."
"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."
"The configuring of the JWT token would be improved as it is a confusing process. We require more information on this part of the solution."
"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."
"It is an expensive solution and not very suitable for smaller businesses."
"With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved."
"The price has room for improvement."
"In terms of improvements, maybe on the API monetization side, having users able to create separate consumption plans and throttle all those consumption plans towards the run time could be better."
"There are things that could be improved with the webMethods API gateway. One thing is that it's too attached to the integration service and we'd like it to be a little bit more independent. We would like for them to separate operations so that it doesn't rely on the bulky integration server and so that it can be used everywhere."
More Microsoft Azure API Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure API Management is ranked 1st in API Management with 67 reviews while webMethods API Gateway is ranked 12th in API Management with 9 reviews. Microsoft Azure API Management is rated 7.8, while webMethods API Gateway is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure API Management writes "Efficiently manages and monetizes API ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods API Gateway writes "We developed several services in the cloud using a sandbox environment for our last hackathon". Microsoft Azure API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Kong Gateway Enterprise and IBM API Connect, whereas webMethods API Gateway is most compared with Apigee, webMethods.io Integration, Kong Gateway Enterprise, webMethods Microgateway and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager. See our Microsoft Azure API Management vs. webMethods API Gateway report.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management 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.
