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

Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 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

Sterling Commerce Connect:D...
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
94
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (2nd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), API Management (10th), Cloud Data Integration (8th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is 5.4%, down from 8.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.1%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct5.4%
webMethods.io2.1%
Other92.5%
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1955103 - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Vice President at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Has delivered robust secure file transfer with exceptional encryption features
Based on experience, the one area IBM can improve for Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is the support mechanism. While support is available 24/7 whenever required, the solution time during American hours can take longer. In general, during American hours, the resource availability is not up to the standard. However, availability of support staff during UK timings or GMT timings is very good; they are supportive and helpful. Functionality-wise, they can make additional improvements to Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct. They recently improved by adding a GUI for configurations on Windows as well as UNIX platforms, which is very helpful. However, the web client is cumbersome and not as interactive as it should be. The CLI part is comprehensive, but the GUI needs improvement.
YM
Developer at a hospitality company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Offers strong integration capabilities and reliable features but needs pricing and scaling improvements
Many things are evolving with the AI buzz in the market. What I would like to see improved or enhanced in webMethods.io in the future is that since webMethods.io is already under IBM, I think IBM will introduce and integrate AI into it. Additionally, regarding what webMethods.io can improve is the license cost. Other cloud players are also providing the same kind of functionality, such as AWS and Azure. webMethods.io is being installed on-premises, but AWS is providing it directly in the cloud. When comparing the license cost and request per minute cost, webMethods.io needs to address that. There are many competitors in the market for this.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Connect Direct offers Check Point functionality to ensure data integrity during transfers."
"The product has been very stable."
"The solution's file transfer speed is quite high."
"The Security Plus feature of this solution is excellent, and allows you to send encrypted files very securely to remote destinations."
"Connect Direct offers Check Point functionality to ensure data integrity during transfers."
"The most valuable feature of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is its flexibility with encryption."
"For Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, my overall rating is ten out of ten."
"Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is a solution that is on the market for a very long time. There is an integrator that has been developed and evolves every year. On the roadmap, there is always a new integration. For example, it's one of the solutions in the market that out of the box can handle EBICS protocol. The file processing is done very well. By default, there are a lot of configurations that can be customized."
"Oracle's self-service capabilities, of which we make extensive use, is the most valuable feature."
"The stability is good."
"The tool is very powerful and user-friendly."
"In the API gateway, there is a new feature that allows us to filter logs within a payload. This has been a useful feature."
"EDI is robust and integration with SAP is good."
"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."
"It is good for communicating between the systems and for publishing and subscribing. We can easily retrieve data. It is good in terms of troubleshooting and other things."
"Clients choose webMethods.io API for its intuitive interface, promoting seamless interaction and quick communication between systems."
 

Cons

"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
"User interface is not user friendly."
"The initial setup could be simpler and better."
"The resources required for this tool are costly and not easily available in the market."
"Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct could improve by adding some of the functionality that some other vendors have. For example, GoAnywhere has call agents, which are small clients that can be installed on the endpoints and can be handled by the central point on the server. If I want to do this with the IBM solution, I have to sell a lot of account addresses. The price could be unprofitable for the customer. There is some small functionality that could be implemented and could be easily done to improve this solution."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"I do not have any notes for improvement."
"Technical support is the number one concern."
"Prices should be reduced, ideally by up to 30% for long-term customers like us."
"​Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
"Prices should be reduced, ideally by up to 30% for long-term customers like us."
"This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support."
"Upgrades are complex. They typically take about five months from start to finish. There are many packages that plug into webMethods Integration Server, which is the central point for a vast majority of the transactions at my organization. Anytime we are upgrading that, there are complexities within each component that we must understand. That makes any upgrade very cumbersome and complicated. That has been my experience at this company. Because there are many different business units that we are touching, there are so many different components that we are touching. The amount of READMEs that you have to go through takes some time."
"webMethods Integration Server needs to add more adapters."
"The product must add more compatible connectors."
"The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's licensing cost is too high."
"Annual licensing fee."
"The price and licensing of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is expensive."
"The solution’s pricing is too high."
"Most of my clients would like the price of the solution to be reduced."
"I would like to see better pricing for the license."
"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."
"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."
"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."
"The pricing is a yearly license."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
879,768 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
33%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
Media Company
5%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise64
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct?
Based on experience, the one area IBM can improve for Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is the support mechanism. While support is available 24/7 whenever required, the solution time during American...
What is your primary use case for Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct?
The majority use case for Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is for file transfer, specifically secure file transfer.
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

HZMO, Bank of Communications
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,768 professionals have used our research since 2012.