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

SwaggerHub 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

SwaggerHub
Ranking in API Management
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in API Management
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (2nd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (9th), Cloud Data Integration (8th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the API Management category, the mindshare of SwaggerHub is 1.4%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.6%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
webMethods.io2.6%
SwaggerHub1.4%
Other96.0%
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

SwaminathanSubramanian - PeerSpot reviewer
Facilitating enterprise-wide API governance and management
Some areas of SwaggerHub that could be improved include the interface between the code editor and the visual editor, the integration with private APIs, which currently requires an upgraded account. The scalability also needs enhancement, as it becomes flaky under increased load. Additionally, the versioning management could be improved to be on par with source code management tools.
MohanPrasad - PeerSpot reviewer
Smooth integration and enhanced deployment with high licensing cost
webMethods.io was used to integrate APIs through the webMethods.io platform, trigger database events, and connect backend APIs through a Java backend. It was used extensively for integration purposes in my organization Integration became smoother, troubleshooting was easier, and deployment and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is quite a useful tool. It is quite good with the validation of the spec. It works quite well in terms of errors and conformity to the OpenAPI standard. It is better than Visual Studio Code in terms of editing."
"The scalability is endless."
"One of the best features of SwaggerHub is how it allows me to create APIs and control the evolution of APIs within an organization."
"I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten."
"You can click & play and add the notation in a human-readable form. Spotlight is also very good in the graphical design of APIs."
"The most valuable features are the collaboration between multiple teams and the control and distribution of specifications."
"It is a stable solution."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy and not at all difficult."
"webMethods API Portal is overall very valuable. It is now a comprehensive API catalogue that serves various purposes, including API assessment and evaluation."
"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."
"We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces."
"It's easy to construct new interfaces like apps and client portals."
"We have found the pricing of the solution to be fair."
"All of the components are very independent but are tied together to give the business value."
"I would say the core Web-based integrations work the best. They are the most efficient and robust implementations one can do with webMethods."
"This solution has given us a competitive advantage because we have better automation and insight."
 

Cons

"SwaggerHub could be improved with better integration for tools."
"The scalability aspect of SwaggerHub can be improved. It becomes a bit unreliable when the load is increased and isn't up to par with expectations for scalability."
"SwaggerHub's UI needs to be improved as it looks very old school."
"Some areas of SwaggerHub that could be improved include the interface between the code editor and the visual editor, the integration with private APIs, which currently requires an upgraded account."
"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."
"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."
"It has limited functionality...Unfortunately, some of its features are not what we need."
"The review process should be improved. There seem to be some gaps, at least for us, for the editing part because we would like to have a full request review mechanism. They support some comments, but it is really hard to manage those comments. We would like to use the full request. Therefore, we are now looking to integrate with repositories. It has integration with Bitbucket and GitHub, but we have some internal constraints, and we need to move some of the repositories to GitHub. Our source code is on-premise in Bitbucket, and it was a bit of a problem for us to integrate. Now we are transitioning our repositories to GitHub, and hopefully, we can enable the integration. This will probably solve the problem with the review and approval. Its customization should also be improved. There are limitations around the support for the developer portal. There should be more customization options for the website that you can use as a developer portal. Currently, it has only Swagger UI with minimal customization. You cannot actually add additional pages and documentation for explaining concepts and general things. That's why we have started to look around to see what other tools are doing. They should also allow tagging on the API. We would like to add some tagging on the API to reflect certain things. Currently, any metadata that you would like to have has to be a part of the spec. You cannot do anything else. It should also have support for Open API 3.1, which was released at the beginning of the year. It would be great to be able to switch to that."
"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."
"This product has too many gaps. You find them after update installations. This should be covered by automatic testing."
"Forced migration from MessageBroker to Universal Messaging requires large scale reimplementation for JMS."
"Prices should be reduced, ideally by up to 30% for long-term customers like us."
"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."
"It is difficult to maintain."
"Scalability and connectors to different cloud applications is lacking."
"The solution's release management feature could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It has a yearly subscription, but I am not sure."
"The tool is cheap."
"webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them."
"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."
"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."
"webMethods Integration Server is expensive, and there's no fixed price on it because it has a point pricing model. You can negotiate, which makes it interesting."
"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."
"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."
"The product is very expensive."
"webMethods.io Integration's pricing is high and has yearly subscription costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
7%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise63
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about SwaggerHub?
The tool's most valuable feature is licensing.
What needs improvement with SwaggerHub?
Some areas of SwaggerHub that could be improved include the interface between the code editor and the visual editor, the integration with private APIs, which currently requires an upgraded account....
What is your primary use case for SwaggerHub?
I started using SwaggerHub in its previous version, SmartMiner, with a tool called SoapUI. I used it to create mock web services to test web services and create test scripts and mock APIs. This usa...
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

Sonic, Zuora, Woolworths, CrowdFlower
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about SwaggerHub vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.