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

Oracle BI Applications vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

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 BI Applications
Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware
18th
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), API Management (10th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Business-to-Business Middleware category, the mindshare of Oracle BI Applications is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 10.0%, up from 8.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business-to-Business Middleware
 

Featured Reviews

RM
Fast calculations, stable, and good support, but needs more visuals, support for HTML5, and BI Publisher updates
It is very cumbersome and slow for making any changes. It doesn't have that many visuals to show different graphs and charts. It should have more visuals. It also doesn't support HTML5, which is useful for interactive sessions and reporting with dashboard etc. We are phasing it out because we need a newer platform that provides us more flexibility and more designs. Our use case is just to get the utility type of monthly reports, and we need visuals, customizations, columns, and certain sections on the report to show performance and other things. They are not updating their BI Publisher product, which was known as XML Publisher before Oracle bought it. It could be because they don't have that many clients using it. We are using it because we have this solution for years.
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

"It has a very robust dashboard and ad-hoc reporting."
"The most valuable features are the reporting and the graphics."
"Calculations are a little bit faster. It can do the on-the-run calculations much better than other reporting platforms. You don't need any other specific tool. You can use Microsoft Office to start doing things with these reports."
"It's web-based so that I can have multiple users accessing the same data. It provides ease of use and its formatting means we can use the data, export it to Excel, and we manipulate the data afterward if we need to."
"​Broker and UM are the best features."
"It's a good tool, and it has a stable messaging broker."
"The MFT component of webMethods, for example, is easy to set up and convenient to use. It handles files very efficiently and it is easy to automate tasks with complex schedules. Monitoring is centralized to MWS which can be used to monitor other products as well (Trading Networks, BPM, MFT, etc.)"
"We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces."
"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."
"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."
"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."
"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."
 

Cons

"The initial setup was difficult because not all the information was included in the implementation model."
"The initial setup was complex and it took a lot of time to set up the infrastructure."
"It is very cumbersome and slow for making any changes. It doesn't have that many visuals to show different graphs and charts. It should have more visuals. It also doesn't support HTML5, which is useful for interactive sessions and reporting with dashboard etc. We are phasing it out because we need a newer platform that provides us more flexibility and more designs. Our use case is just to get the utility type of monthly reports, and we need visuals, customizations, columns, and certain sections on the report to show performance and other things. They are not updating their BI Publisher product, which was known as XML Publisher before Oracle bought it. It could be because they don't have that many clients using it. We are using it because we have this solution for years."
"The orchestration is not as good as it should be."
"When migration happens from the one release to an upgraded release from Software AG, many of the existing services are deprecated and developers have to put in effort testing and redeveloping some of the services. It would be better that upgrade releases took care to support the lower-level versions of webMethods."
"The solution should include REST API calls."
"Some of the things that we use cannot be done in this solution. For these things, we have to either use a Java service or a util service. There is no predefined or existing service that we can use. So, we have to work on the util service and write on top of it. Its price can also be better. It is pretty costly because they charge us for each transmission."
"With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved."
"Prices should be reduced, ideally by up to 30% for long-term customers like us."
"t doesn't represent OOP very well, just a method and proprietary interface called IData."
"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As with any case study that we’ve ever done, it’s not so much a problem with the application or security or anything of that nature. It’s basically the cost infrastructure. Compared to other solutions, it’s one of the more costly solutions out there. It’s the biggest concern nowadays that upper management has."
"It is expensive. It is more than 100K for support. You pay for support on top of the standard licensing, which is on a yearly basis."
"With our current licensing, it's very easy for us to scale. With our older licensing model, it was very hard. This is definitely something that I would highlight."
"Initialy good pricing and good, if it comes to Enterprise license agreements."
"Sometimes we don't have a very clear idea what the licensing will entail at first, because it can be very customizable. On one hand, this can be a good thing, because it can be tailored to a specific customer's needs. But on the other hand it can also be an issue when some customer asks, "What's the cost?" and we can't yet give them an accurate answer."
"The price is high and I give it a five out of ten."
"There is a license needed to use the webMethods Integration Server."
"I am not involved in the licensing side of things."
"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."
"The pricing is a yearly license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business-to-Business Middleware solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
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

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cox Enterprises, Lochbridge
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle BI Applications vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.