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

Microsoft Azure Logic Apps vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 17, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
3.0
Microsoft Azure Logic Apps offers significant integration benefits, with ROI varying from 10% to 30% depending on specifics.
Sentiment score
7.1
Organizations achieve significant ROI with webMethods.io, citing reduced manual work and integration time, despite potential cost considerations.
You can't generalize it because it depends on how many connectors you use, how many workflows you build, what scalability is required, and the amount of data to be ingested.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
Microsoft Azure Logic Apps support is mixed, with varying response times, but premium plans and proactive support are appreciated.
Sentiment score
6.6
webMethods.io customer service is praised for quick support, though responses vary, with suggestions for localized and faster service.
It is easy to reach out to Microsoft for support if needed.
The support is good, with multiple options like developer support and 24x7 support.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
5.6
Microsoft Azure Logic Apps offer high scalability and ease for configuring and automating workflows, ideal for small and medium enterprises.
Sentiment score
7.2
webMethods.io is highly scalable for cloud solutions and adaptable for large integrations, despite licensing and configuration challenges.
It's just clicks away, and you can also set it up as auto-scaling.
Whenever more resources are needed, they become available automatically without any human interference.
Vertically, scalability is fine, however, I have not expanded horizontally with the product yet.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.1
Microsoft Azure Logic Apps is highly rated for stability and reliability, with minimal downtime despite occasional architectural issues.
Sentiment score
7.6
webMethods.io is stable and reliable with minor issues, enhanced by frequent updates, though rapid changes can be problematic.
I have never seen it misperforming.
We have had it implemented for two years without issues.
We provide support to our clients, and the minimum calls I receive are for webMethods.io; it's very stable.
There are some issues like the tool hanging or the need for additional jars when exposing web services.
 

Room For Improvement

Microsoft Azure Logic Apps struggles with user interface, affordability, documentation clarity, customization, performance, pricing predictability, and integration improvements.
webMethods.io needs better documentation, stability, integration, performance, and user-friendly features, including cost-effective licensing and advanced capabilities.
Microsoft Azure Logic Apps needs further development in consistency and durability, particularly for handling larger data volumes beyond 1 MB.
My experience with their pricing indicates that pricing is complicated to understand and costly.
The business rules engine is still not fully developed, and it would be very helpful to see improvements here.
Another enhancement would be in OCR; currently, there is a huge demand for OCR capabilities. It would be perfect if webMethods.io had a built-in component for OCR, as this would be tested and allow customers to use it better than a third-party OCR application.
A special discount of at least 50% for old customers would allow us to expand our services and request more resources.
 

Setup Cost

Microsoft Azure Logic Apps offers cost-effective pay-per-use pricing but can become expensive at larger scales with complex needs.
webMethods.io is costly, ideal for big enterprises; licensing complex; negotiations common, but valued for its capabilities and support.
There are no upfront licensing costs or contracts you are bound to.
Microsoft provides a reliable solution, but it is considered expensive compared to others.
Regarding the pricing and licensing of webMethods.io, I don't think it's expensive when compared with the features.
 

Valuable Features

Microsoft Azure Logic Apps offers minimal code, fast deployment, seamless integration, scalability, and reliable automation for diverse systems.
webMethods.io provides scalable integration, intuitive API management, extensive connector support, robust security, and seamless connectivity for complex integrations.
Microsoft Azure Logic Apps has many features that are beneficial for workflow automation, such as running automation tasks and facilitating communication between different interfaces.
Even for Blob storage, we use tokenized endpoints that give us access to this storage account, making it secure.
The workflow in Logic Apps enables integrating multiple applications.
It facilitates the exposure of around 235 services through our platform to feed various government entities across the entire country.
I believe data transformation is exceptional in webMethods.io because they have an online database that can cache the database online.
 

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft Azure Logic Apps
Ranking in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (11th), API Management (11th), Cloud Data Integration (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) category, the mindshare of Microsoft Azure Logic Apps is 12.4%, down from 14.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 7.9%, down from 9.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Azure Logic Apps12.4%
webMethods.io7.9%
Other79.7%
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
 

Featured Reviews

Gayatri Dhawade - PeerSpot reviewer
Has supported seamless integration flows while requiring improvement in cost transparency
Assessing the ease of connecting disparate systems using Microsoft Azure Logic Apps connectors is simple because we have a Standard Operating Process. If we want to use Logic Apps, we just reserve the instances as per our requirement. Even for Blob storage, we use tokenized endpoints that give us access to this storage account, making it secure. At API Gateway, we have policies that help us implement encryption and decryption. Request parameters are mapped automatically, converted to SOAP, XML, or JSON as needed in different formats. We utilize its monitoring capabilities; Event Grids are used for logging events. Additionally, we have implemented a retry mechanism and are using Azure Monitor for end-to-end request tracing.
Derrick Brockel - PeerSpot reviewer
An integration platform that enables you to automate tasks by connecting apps and services
Follow best practices,engage in their professional services to help build your messaging system and to be PR have some PR emphasis and and blue Bluegreen deployment You could take half your your clusters out, upgrade them, and put them back in so you have a quick callback. And also patch quarterly, we got we got downbound. And and at that point, it's a little hard to get into the cycle when you're releasing software every every week, and you're trying to, go through an upgrade seven fifty servers, it's a little hard to get into the upgrade flow when when you're running that tight. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
871,469 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise24
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise63
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Microsoft Azure Logic Apps?
The solution's most valuable feature is the no-code/low-code feature.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure Logic Apps?
Regarding the cost, I find Microsoft Azure Logic Apps to be reasonable; it is not expensive.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Azure Logic Apps?
State management is the main challenge I have faced with Microsoft Azure Logic Apps during this period of time. The issues I am facing with state management in Microsoft Azure Logic Apps arise beca...
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.
 

Also Known As

Azure Logic Apps, MS Azure Logic Apps
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

nord lock, mission linen supply, esmart systems
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Azure Logic Apps vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
871,469 professionals have used our research since 2012.