Microsoft Azure API Management and WSO2 API Manager are both competitive products in the API management category. Microsoft Azure API Management seems to have the upper hand due to its seamless integration with the Microsoft ecosystem and its strong developer support.
Features: Microsoft Azure API Management is known for its robust integration with Azure services and Active Directory, providing a secure platform with strong API gateway features. It also offers rich developer support and examples for ease of use. WSO2 API Manager benefits from its open-source nature, allowing flexibility and customization. It offers essential API management functions, even in its free version, which makes it cost-effective for self-supporting companies.
Room for Improvement: Microsoft Azure API Management could improve its documentation and support for on-premises deployment, currently a limitation for non-premium tiers. Enhancing versioning support, multi-tenancy functionalities, and user management would increase its flexibility. WSO2 API Manager needs a more user-friendly interface and a streamlined installation process. Improving integration features and environment support could further its appeal.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Microsoft Azure API Management is favored for its strength in public and hybrid cloud environments, particularly for businesses within the Azure ecosystem, though some users report delays in service. WSO2 API Manager offers deployment flexibility, mainly suitable for on-premises environments, though technical support feedback is mixed, indicating a need for better documentation and quicker response.
Pricing and ROI: Microsoft Azure API Management features tiered pricing, which might become expensive, particularly for premium features like VNet integration, yet its comprehensive offerings might justify costs for larger enterprises. WSO2 API Manager, being open-source, is mostly free with no basic licensing fees, providing a budget-friendly choice for developers. The ROI for both platforms largely depends on deployment scale, enhancing application integration and reducing lead times.
Proper configuration of the solution, implementation strategy and correct scaling tier selection are other factors that influence the ROI.
It helps connect all multi-environment applications to a single dashboard and give beautiful reports.
If I am working in AWS and with Azure, I see that Azure is much easier and helps save time while also being able to manage and deploy the API services.
The documentation from Microsoft helps our company to solve issues on our own.
The initial support engineers are often not qualified.
I logged an incident, and it was resolved promptly within three hours.
The support is good, with well-defined documentation and helpful blogs.
I've worked with multiple tools from an observability perspective, such as Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Splunk, and Elasticsearch, and I find KQL and APIM amazing and filled with useful features.
It handles our current workload well, and I'm optimistic it can scale effectively as our needs grow.
There are no limitations to adding any number of devices.
I can't guarantee its stability or flexibility until all our databases and financial systems are integrated.
Microsoft Azure API Management is very stable.
With high scalability and availability, it supports many users and endpoints without significant issues.
The system is stable for our low-concurrency use cases.
The service is extensive and expensive, and this added flexibility would make it more manageable and less prone to errors.
It's quite expensive, which could be a barrier for some users.
Documentations for the product should include examples of implementation.
Our integrations do not handle high-volume transactions.
It's an expensive solution.
However, once you scale up to your full volume, it'll be more expensive.
Microsoft Azure is an expensive solution not for the large enterprises but for medium and small.
The platform's most valuable features are its rule-based permissions and comprehensive API lifecycle management capabilities.
The ability to create a subscription model for APIs allows companies to monetize valuable data and share it securely.
The analytics phase of API Management is very beneficial for tracking API usage and identifying suspicious users.
The product's capabilities for integrating with REST APIs are valuable.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Microsoft Azure API Management | 16.7% |
| WSO2 API Manager | 5.0% |
| Other | 78.3% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 23 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 11 |
| Large Enterprise | 52 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 14 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 7 |
| Large Enterprise | 21 |
Microsoft Azure API Management is essential for managing APIs, facilitating integration, and ensuring secure internal and external communication.
Organizations leverage Microsoft Azure API Management for seamless integration and effective API management. It supports microservices, legacy modernization, and platform orchestration in sectors like healthcare, telecom, and finance. Features such as developer portals and centralized libraries simplify usage. While it showcases strengths in hybrid cloud support and scalability, improvements are suggested in versioning and multi-tenancy.
What key features does it offer?Microsoft Azure API Management aids modernization across healthcare, telecom, and financial services by enabling legacy system updates and facilitating smooth platform orchestration.
WSO2 API Manager is a comprehensive platform that allows organizations to design, publish, and manage APIs.
It provides a centralized interface for API governance, security, and analytics.
With features like API monetization and developer portal, it enables businesses to drive innovation and create new revenue streams.
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.
