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

Oracle API Platform Cloud Service vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Oracle API Platform Cloud S...
Ranking in API Management
25th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in API Management
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the API Management category, the mindshare of Oracle API Platform Cloud Service is 0.7%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.3%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

Mahaboob Pasha - PeerSpot reviewer
Secure and simplify API management with effective deployment options
In our organization, we use Oracle API Platform Cloud Service primarily to host and manage our middleware APIs. Our middleware APIs are registered on this platform and exposed to a fixed domain, which supports our organizational goals effectively Since our enterprise has many APIs, Oracle API…
Michele Illiano - PeerSpot reviewer
Can function as an ESB along with the core product, with decent integration of message protocols
I have noticed that webMethods ActiveTransfer has had problems when handling large files. For example, when we receive (and perform operations on) files that are larger than about 16 MB, the software starts losing performance. This is why, for most customers who have to deal with big files, I suggest that they use a product other than ActiveTransfer. I would like to note that this problem mainly concerns large files that undergo extra operations, such assigning, unassigning, or file translation. When these operations take place on large files, ActiveTransfer will use up a lot of resources. Within the product itself, I also believe that there is room for improvement in terms of optimization when it comes to general performance. I suspect that the issues underlying poor optimization are because it is all developed in Java. That is, all the objects and functions that are used need to be better organized, especially when it comes to big files but also overall. webMethods ActiveTransfer was born as an ESB to handle messages, and these messages were typically very short, i.e. small in size. A message is data that you have to send to an application, where it must be received in real-time and possibly processed or acknowledged elsewhere in the system as well. So, because it was initially designed for small messages, it struggles with performance when presented with very large files. All this to say, I suggest that they have an engineer reevaluate the architecture of the product in order to consider cases where large files are sent, and not only small ones. As for new features, compared to other products in the market, I think Software AG should be more up to date when it comes to extra protocol support, especially those protocols that other solutions have included in their products by default. Whenever we need to add an unsupported protocol, we have to go through the effort of custom development in order to work with it. Also, all the banks are obligated to migrate to the new standards, and big companies are all handling translations and operating their libraries with the new protocol formats. But webMethods ActiveTransfer doesn't seem to be keeping up with this evolution. Thus, they should aim to be more compliant in future, along the lines of their competitors such as IBM and Primeur.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features are the easy integration with the Oracle cloud, and that it's easy to use."
"The Gateways are communicating with a Management Service, which lives in the Cloud, to send usage information or to fetch changes for the deployed APIs."
"Oracle's APIP CS is a platform capable for consistently covering the complete API Lifecycle from design to retirement, supporting an API-first approach."
"I find the customizable dashboards convenient. When you have a privatized dashboard, it's easy to log in, get an immediate snapshot of what's happening, and quickly address any problems."
"All API usage is now governed and tracked."
"Oracle API Platform Cloud Service's UI is quite user-friendly and supports a hybrid deployment model."
"The solution is stable."
"The security mode and the deployment process are significant assets, offering simplified deployment and effective troubleshooting options, including Docker support."
"ActiveTransfer lets us maintain the file in the staging area before we transfer it. After that, we can remove the file to make sure that the reconciliation process is done. Sometimes we will zip and unzip the files, but if we have a GKB file, we often ignore it."
"All of the components are very independent but are tied together to give the business value."
"The messaging part is the most valuable feature."
"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."
"Oracle's self-service capabilities, of which we make extensive use, is the most valuable feature."
"The Software AG Designer has been great. It's very intuitive."
"The product supports various types of digital documents, including XMLs and EDI."
"WebMethods.io is a powerful tool, but it requires skilled people who can fully utilize its potential."
 

Cons

"In future updates, we might be interested to see more enhancements after exploring the existing features over the next year."
"There should be closer integration between the API Platform Cloud Service and the Identity Cloud Service to allow IDCS Applications, protecting backend systems, to be linked to the API Applications that consumers use to access APIs."
"The solution's cost in terms of scaling could be better."
"Oracle API Platform Cloud Service provides an API documentation tool, which is quite outdated."
"I would like to see enhanced support for SOAP Service and the corresponding WS-Security policies."
"In the next release, I would like to see more security policies and for it to include an on-cloud gateway."
"Even when an API is functioning correctly, there seems to be a glitch within OCI (Oracle Cloud Infrastructure)."
"We got the product via a reseller, and the support from the reseller has been less than desirable."
"I would like to see the price improve."
"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."
"​Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
"As webMethods Integration Server is expensive, that's its area for improvement."
"The licensing cost is high compared to other options."
"The installation process should be simplified for first time users and be made more user-friendly."
"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Oracle API Platform Cloud Service is a cheap solution."
"The solution is expensive to scale."
"Pricing depends on the specific services used."
"The pricing is for each logical gateway (a logical gateway can have multiple physical nodes)."
"This is an expensive product and we may replace it with something more reasonably priced."
"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."
"It is a cost-effective solution."
"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."
"It is worth the cost."
"I do see a lack of capabilities inside of the monetization area for them. They have a cloud infrastructure that is pay per use type of a thing. If you already use 1,000 transactions per se, then you can be charged and billed. I see room for improvement there for their side on that particular capability of the monetization."
"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."
"Based on our team discussions and feedback, it is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
11%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Oracle API Platform Cloud Service?
I find the customizable dashboards convenient. When you have a privatized dashboard, it's easy to log in, get an immediate snapshot of what's happening, and quickly address any problems.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Oracle API Platform Cloud Service?
The pricing and licensing are considered competitive, especially since our enterprise uses multiple Oracle products, which makes the integration seamless and cost-effective.
What needs improvement with Oracle API Platform Cloud Service?
Currently, there is nothing in particular that we feel needs improvement. However, in future updates, we might be interested to see more enhancements after exploring the existing features over the ...
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

No data available
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

API Matic, Trunk Club
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle API Platform Cloud Service vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.