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

SAS Data Integration Server vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

SAS Data Integration Server
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (37th)
webMethods.io
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) (9th), API Management (9th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Featured Reviews

NN
Offloads processes on the server side but needs better installation syntax
One area for improvement is the installation process. Another point could be the syntax, as it sometimes involves using syntax names that are not intuitive. For example, to calculate the difference between two dates, the general syntax in SAS is called the data difference or data net function. However, another name is used, such as NF and INK. Without knowledge of SAS programming, it becomes unclear what these functions mean. It is not good to define function names this way.
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 solution is very stable."
"A key feature allows us to enhance job performance by offloading processing to the server side, rather than processing on the server itself."
"A key feature allows us to enhance job performance by offloading processing to the server side, rather than processing on the server itself."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its amazing capabilities in regard to data handling."
"A key feature allows us to enhance job performance by offloading processing to the server side, rather than processing on the server itself."
"The solution offers very good data manipulation and loading."
"The product is very stable."
"What I found most valuable in webMethods Integration Server is that it's a strong ESB. It also has strong API modules and portals."
"​Broker and UM are the best features."
"We can arrange data caching and look at the solid state. Also, the API gateway is a very good component that can handle relevant cachings and integrations, as well as and also load permitting."
"WebMethods.io is a powerful tool, but it requires skilled people who can fully utilize its potential."
"The performance is good."
"When it comes to the user interface, I'm already really used to it. I cannot say anything against it. For me, it's easy to use."
"webMethods API Portal is overall very valuable. It is now a comprehensive API catalogue that serves various purposes, including API assessment and evaluation."
 

Cons

"The initial setup of SAS Data Integration Server was complex."
"The initial setup had issues, and even after using it for about one year, it was still not fixed."
"The transform tool has limited access. They should make it more flexible."
"The initial setup had issues, and even after using it for about one year, it was still not fixed."
"So I would like to see improved integration with other software."
"One area for improvement is the installation process."
"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 quick."
"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."
"The improvement needed is related to the model's position. As of now, it seems to be more of a conceptual idea rather than a widely implemented solution. For how long"
"The price has room for improvement."
"The solution should include REST API calls."
"It could be more user-friendly."
"Technical support is an area where they can improve."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is an expensive program."
"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."
"Some of the licensing is "component-ized," which is confusing to new users/customers."
"It is worth the cost."
"Its cost depends on the use cases."
"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."
"I would like to see better pricing for the license."
"Initialy good pricing and good, if it comes to Enterprise license agreements."
"webMethods Trading Networks is a bit costly compared to others solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
12%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about SAS Data Integration Server?
The most valuable feature of the solution is its amazing capabilities in regard to data handling.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SAS Data Integration Server?
I don't handle the cost and budget part. From the tool's perspective, I can say that it is an amazing product.
What needs improvement with SAS Data Integration Server?
One area for improvement is the installation process. Another point could be the syntax, as it sometimes involves using syntax names that are not intuitive. For example, to calculate the difference...
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

SAS Enterprise Data Integration Server, Enterprise Data Integration Server
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Credit Guarantee Corporation, Cr_dito y Cauci‹n, Delaware State Police, Deutsche Lufthansa, Directorate of Economics and Statistics, DSM, Livzon Pharmaceutical Group, Los Angeles County, Miami Herald Media Company, Netherlands Enterprise Agency, New Zealand Ministry of Health, Nippon Paper, West Midlands Police, XS Inc., Zenith Insurance
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about SAS Data Integration Server vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.