We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

Mule ESB vs webMethods Integration Server comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Mule ESB vs. webMethods Integration Server and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
564,997 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"What Mule provides out-of-box is a sufficient product.""The solution offers multiple deployment options.""The most valuable feature is that it's programmer-friendly, so it's very easy to develop APIs.""The connectivity the solution provides is excellent. There are often too many systems that we have to integrate and this helps with that.""The transformation and the data format are the features that I like the most.""It was pretty fast to develop APIs on this platform, which is something I liked about it. So, the time to value was pretty good.""Everything runs in Java, which is a useful feature.""It is easily deployable and manageable. It has microservices-based architecture, which means that you can deploy the solution based on your needs, and you can manage the solution very easily."

More Mule ESB Pros →

"The ease of mapping... is the single largest feature. It gives us the ability to craft anything. A lot of single-purpose technologies, like Mirth, are good for healthcare messages, but we use webMethods not only for healthcare messages but for other business-related purposes, like integrations to Salesforce or integrations to Office 365. It's multi-purpose nature is very strong.""It's very flexible and a good platform to use.""It's a visual tool, so our transformations can be quickly implemented without a lot of fuss. The fact that we have an easy way to expose REST services is also very interesting. It offers the possibility to connect over GMS to synchronize message brokers.""I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server.""The comprehensiveness and depth of Integration Servers' connectors to packaged apps and custom apps is unlimited. They have a connector for everything. If they don't, you can build it yourself. Or oftentimes, if there is value for other customers as well, you can talk with webMethods about creating a new adapter for you.""The Software AG Designer has been great. It's very intuitive.""The solution's ease-of-use is its most valuable feature, in which complex issues may be resolved.""All of the components are very independent but are tied together to give the business value."

More webMethods Integration Server Pros →

Cons
"MuleSoft is not so strong in method-based integration, so they're not so functional in that regard.""There are limitations with the subscription model that comes with the product.""The solution isn't as stable as we'd like it to be. There are some ongoing issues and therefore Mule has to provide frequent patches. Mule's core IP should be more stable overall.""It's not easy to troubleshoot and we still can't make it work.""In order to meet the new trend of active metadata management, we need intelligent APIs that can retrieve new data designs and trigger actions over new findings without human intervention.""There are some issues with both stability and scalability.""It would be great to see implementing security modules as a feature.""We would like the ability to use our own code. This would allow us to develop customizations with ease. Additionally, it would be nice to have more analytics or insights on the exchanged information between databases."

More Mule ESB Cons →

"It would be nice if they had a change management system offering. We built our own deployer application because the one built into webMethods couldn't enforce change management rules. Integration into a change management system, along with the version control system, would be a good offering; it's something that they're lacking.""I would like to see the price improve.""The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern.""I would like to have a dashboard where I can see all of the communication between components and the configuration.""The price should be reduced to make it more affordable.""Technical support is an area where they can improve.""The Software AG Designer could be more memory-efficient or CPU-efficient so that we can use it with middle-spec hardware.""There should be better logging, or a better dashboard, to allow you to see see the logs of the services."

More webMethods Integration Server Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The licensing is yearly, and there are additional fees for services."
  • "This product is cheaper than some offered by other vendors, although there is a problem because you have to pay for some third-party adapters."
  • "Most of the challenges that I had with this solution were for smaller customers. There is not a good licensing model or pricing model. It is more expensive than other solutions, and that's the downside of MuleSoft. I had to be creative to be able to sell it to the business, but we did. This is something they have to work on because for large companies, it's affordable, but for small and medium businesses, it's very hard to sell."
  • "This product is expensive, but it does offer value for money."
  • More Mule ESB Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."
  • "The vendor is flexible with respect to pricing."
  • "This is an expensive product and we may replace it with something more reasonably priced."
  • "It's a good deal for the money that we pay."
  • "Currently, the licensing solution for this product is pretty straightforward. The way that Software AG has moved in their licensing agreements is very understandable. It is very easy for you to see where things land. Like most vendors today, they are transaction based. Therefore, just having a good understanding of how many transactions that you are doing a year would be very wise. Luckily, there are opportunities to work with the vendor to get a good understanding of how many transactions you have and what is the right limit for you to fall under."
  • "Pricing is the number-one downfall. It's too expensive. They could make more money by dropping the price in half and getting more customers. It's the best product there is, but it's too expensive."
  • "I do think webMethods is coming under increasing pressure when it comes to their price-to-feature value proposition. It's probably the single biggest strategic risk they have. They're very expensive in their industry. They've been raising the price recently, especially when compared with their competitors."
  • "The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."
  • More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
    564,997 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: 
    I was previously part of the Oracle SOA/OSB development team. In my current capacity I architected solutions using MuleSoft Anypoint Platform on cloud / on-premises and hybrid modes and on PCE/RTF on… more »
    Top Answer: 
    Our team ran a comparison of IBM’s Integration Bus vs. Mule ESB in order to determine what sort of ESB software was the best fit for our organization. Ultimately we decided to choose IBM Integration… more »
    Top Answer: 
    The solution has a good graphical interface.
    Top Answer: 
    It's a visual tool, so our transformations can be quickly implemented without a lot of fuss. The fact that we have an easy way to expose REST services is also very interesting. It offers the… more »
    Top Answer: 
    I don't think webMethods is the cheapest but I think the quality is worth it. But it's not cheap. We're satisfied with our choice and the price is not a reason to look for something else.
    Top Answer: 
    In terms of improvement, it would be better if it adapted quicker to open standards. It took a while for API specification before the last version was available. The spec of version two was rather… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    18,126
    Comparisons
    13,897
    Reviews
    9
    Average Words per Review
    404
    Rating
    7.6
    Views
    15,790
    Comparisons
    11,483
    Reviews
    11
    Average Words per Review
    1,185
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Learn More
    Overview
    For companies looking to modernize and unlock the value of existing on-premises systems and applications, an enterprise service bus (ESB) architecture serves as a critical foundation layer for SOA. When deployed as an ESB, the Mule runtime engine of Anypoint Platform combines the power of data and application integration across legacy systems and SaaS applications, with a seamless path to the other capabilities of Anypoint Platform and the full power of API-led connectivity.

    The award-winning webMethods Integration Server, our Enterprise Service Bus (ESB), is a complete enterprise application integration solution. It's standards-based so it "speaks" any technology. You can integrate any technology from any vendor: ERP systems, databases, mainframes and legacy apps. SaaS platforms, Web services, JMS messaging systems and packaged apps.

    Offer
    Learn more about Mule ESB
    Learn more about webMethods Integration Server
    Sample Customers
    Ube, PacificComp, University of Witwatersrand, Justice Systems, Camelot
    Fujitsu, Coca Cola, ING, Credit Suisse, Electrolux, GTA, CosmosDirekt
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm33%
    Computer Software Company22%
    Healthcare Company11%
    Manufacturing Company11%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company35%
    Comms Service Provider15%
    Financial Services Firm7%
    Energy/Utilities Company7%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Manufacturing Company19%
    Energy/Utilities Company12%
    Insurance Company12%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company33%
    Comms Service Provider15%
    Financial Services Firm6%
    Energy/Utilities Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business40%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business31%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise60%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise7%
    Large Enterprise77%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business29%
    Midsize Enterprise8%
    Large Enterprise63%
    Find out what your peers are saying about Mule ESB vs. webMethods Integration Server and other solutions. Updated: January 2022.
    564,997 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Mule ESB is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 13 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 1st in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 16 reviews. Mule ESB is rated 8.0, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Mule ESB writes "Scaled easily, had good ROI and time to value, and didn't require taking care of the infrastructure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Its single hybrid-integration platform makes it easy to troubleshoot and quickly resolve issues. Upgrades are complex". Mule ESB is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, Oracle Service Bus, TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus, Red Hat Fuse and Mule Anypoint Platform, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, SAP Process Orchestration, Mule Anypoint Platform, Oracle Service Bus and Boomi AtomSphere Integration. See our Mule ESB vs. webMethods Integration Server report.

    See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.

    We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) 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.