Mule ESB vs WSO2 Enterprise Integrator vs webMethods.io comparison

"The solution improved my company by modernizing the way we offer services and improving the user experience."

"Mule ESB is a very easy-to-use and user-friendly solution."

"Once it is started, we don't see any problems on a day to day basis."

"I'm not using ESB directly. It is the integration layer, so it's running under the hood. However, the conversion and transformation performance is excellent. Anypoint Enterprise Security is also solid."

"The transformation and the data format are the features that I like the most."

"Easy connectivity and easy integration."

"The connectors help to connect with a variety of applications."

"Mule Expression Language"

"One valuable feature is that it is event-driven, so when new data is available on the source it can be quickly processed and displayed. Integration is definitely another useful feature, and B2B is one area where webMethods has its own unique thing going, whereby we can do monitoring of transactions, monitoring of client onboarding, and so on."

"The product is powerful, straightforward, and easy to use."

"WebMethods.io is a powerful tool, but it requires skilled people who can fully utilize its potential."

"It has a good integration server, designer, and a very good API portal."

"The developer portal is a valuable feature."

"The main assets are its flow language, debugging, and Broker. Flow language is far better and more flexible for debugging."

"Application integration, business process integration, and B2B partner integration are valuable. But among these, I feel B2B partner integration is the most valuable. This module integrates two business partners and exchanges data through electronic data interchange messages in the form of specific standards, without any manual process needed."

"The connectivity that the tool provides, along with the functionalities needed for our company's business, are some of the beneficial aspects of the product."

"The stability is excellent."

"The solution has two main parts: integration and transformation. It's very user-friendly and easy to understand for everyone."

"It was mostly easy to set up the product."

"The learning curve for this solution is very good."

"It's a very complete product. It allows us to network security and add more layers of security to the system."

"The drag-and-drop features for connectors are very valuable."

"The installation process is easy."

"The solution basically conforms to our standards."

"The Anypoint platform consumes a lot of memory, and it would be great for developers if it were more lightweight."

"There's room for improvement in multi-file transfer functionality. It's not convenient when using MuleSoft, and it should have better capability for handling large amounts of data. For example, applications like GoAnywhere can handle huge chunks of data, so the tool should also have something to facilitate that aspect of integration."

"It's not easy to troubleshoot and we still can't make it work."

"Improvements could be made in performance."

"There are limitations with the subscription model that comes with the product."

"One area that could be improved is the way that policies are propagated when APIs are moved from one environment to another. It's an issue, but when you develop and test the rest APIs in a lower environment and need to move them, there's a propagation process. This process moves certain aspects of the APIs, like the basic features. But when we move them, the policies don't always move with them. The policies should be able to move so we don't have to redo them manually. There are some APIs we use, but it's a bit tedious."

"It would be great to see implementing security modules as a feature."

"The price of Mule ESB could improve."

"t doesn't represent OOP very well, just a method and proprietary interface called IData."

"Some things could be improved, especially how ActiveTransfer handles third-party file transfers. It would be nice to have a native file-watching mechanism for when you're scheduling jobs with a third-party scheduler. Currently, we are using an outside file watcher solution to check the files before the file transfer. It checks the location to see if the file is there. If the file is there, it will prepare it for transfer. If the file isn't available, it will send an email it can create a ticket send it now. We recommended adding this file watcher mechanism."

"I would like the solution to provide bi-weekly updates."

"The product needs to be improved in a few ways. First, they need to stabilize the components of the whole platform across versions. Also, they should stop replacing old components with brand new ones and, rather, improve by evolution."

"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."

"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."

"The price should be reduced to make it more affordable."

"The solution's release management feature could be better."

"WSO2 libraries are not mature enough. For example, if you want to integrate with Kafka using its Kafka library, it often has many bugs."

"The integration capabilities need to be improved."

"The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"The server is very specific and it is very difficult to get experience with it."

"I would like to see them bring back a feature, from earlier versions, that was very useful in debugging and finding issues."

"The main issue with the product is pricing. It uses core-based pricing for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and API Manager. It would be best if you had APIM by default. It provides many connectors for easy integration with third-party systems."

"I would like to see better documentation for the open-source version."

"The customization can be a bit difficult."

"The licensing is yearly, and there are additional fees for services."

"You will not get any support from Mule ESB's team for the tool's community edition...You can get support with the licensed version of Mule ESB."

"The solution is expensive."

"I think the price is very high. If you use TIBCO BW, the license is for the CPU usage, then the IPS, and support. I also think the license for the product is a one-time expense."

"The pricing must be improved."

"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."

"Regarding licensing and pricing, I find it somewhat flexible. They are more flexible with larger customers compared to small and medium ones, as their licensing model depends on ports and other factors. Large customers benefit from more flexibility in implementation and renewal compared to smaller ones."

"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."

"I don’t have much idea about prices, but webMethods API Portal is not something cheaper."

"I signed a three-year deal with them. It is a yearly locked-in price for the next three years."

"I would like to see better pricing for the license."

"There is a license needed to use the webMethods Integration Server."

"Most of my clients would like the price of the solution to be reduced."

"Initialy good pricing and good, if it comes to Enterprise license agreements."

"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."

"It's a good deal for the money that we pay."

"The open-source, unsupported version is available free of charge."

"The solution costs about 20,000 or 30,000 euros per year, per instance."

"It is a low-cost solution."

"I rate the product price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."

"The pricing of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for enterprise subscriptions can be considered expensive, especially from the perspective of someone who prefers open-source software."

"The cost is better than IBM Cloud Pak."