We performed a comparison between Pipedream and webMethods API Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution enables users to integrate several things."
"The most valuable features of Pipedream are the prebuilt integrations that require no coding."
"It is a developer-friendly platform that allows writing custom scripts."
"The most valuable feature of Pipedream is the ability to use Python code in general."
"There were no complexities involved in the setup phase...The product is able to meet my company's API protection needs."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution for me has been the configuration-based UI. Once you get the hang of it, it enables you to easily develop an API. In addition, it has many in-built policies that are quite handy."
"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."
"The cloud version of the solution is very easy to set up."
"I like the solution's policies, transformation, mediation, and routing features."
"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."
"The developer portal is a valuable feature."
"In the API gateway, there is a new feature that allows us to filter logs within a payload. This has been a useful feature."
"Documentation isn't available for everything in the solution, so you may have to figure out a lot of things by yourself."
"They should give more information about trigger failure."
"There is a potential area for improvement in handling loop operations over items."
"We faced some server timeouts."
"In terms of improvements, maybe on the API monetization side, having users able to create separate consumption plans and throttle all those consumption plans towards the run time could be better."
"The configuring of the JWT token would be improved as it is a confusing process. We require more information on this part of the solution."
"There are things that could be improved with the webMethods API gateway. One thing is that it's too attached to the integration service and we'd like it to be a little bit more independent. We would like for them to separate operations so that it doesn't rely on the bulky integration server and so that it can be used everywhere."
"With performance, there is room for improvement in regards to if we would like to put another extra layer of security on it, such as SSL. This is affecting their performance quite significantly. They need to improve the process of managing the SSL and other things inside their solutions, so there will not be quite such a significant impact to the performance."
"With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved."
"The price has room for improvement."
"It is an expensive solution and not very suitable for smaller businesses."
"Understanding the overall architecture is difficult."
Pipedream is ranked 18th in API Management with 4 reviews while webMethods API Gateway is ranked 11th in API Management with 10 reviews. Pipedream is rated 9.0, while webMethods API Gateway is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Pipedream writes " A tool that ensures that its users see a return on investment from its use". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods API Gateway writes "We developed several services in the cloud using a sandbox environment for our last hackathon". Pipedream is most compared with , whereas webMethods API Gateway is most compared with Apigee, webMethods.io Integration, Kong Gateway Enterprise, webMethods Microgateway and 3scale API Management. See our Pipedream vs. webMethods API Gateway report.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management 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.
