We performed a comparison between SwaggerHub and WSO2 API Manager 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."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."
"I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy and not at all difficult."
"The most valuable features are the collaboration between multiple teams and the control and distribution of specifications."
"Code generation is one of the important features of SwaggerHub. We design our API, and we can generate a very rich codebase and add to it. The code generation feature is very valuable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is licensing."
"It is a stable solution."
"The scalability is endless."
"A complete integration suite and a good platform."
"The product is easy to use."
"The scalability is fine for our purposes."
"There are a lot of tools to help the manager. WSO2 is very easy to install. It has all the principal functionalities that you think about when you want to put up the management solution. It's a very friendly tool."
"This is a flexible and versatile API management solution that has the power to integrate with more than just API."
"The user interface is easy to navigate, and the documentation is extensive. It's open-source, so everything is available, and we can create what we need. That's not necessarily a feature, but it's an advantage."
"WSO2 API Manager is a stable solution."
"WSO2 API Manager's most valuable features are the simple interface that is easy to use and the APIs lifecycle."
"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."
"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice"
"SwaggerHub could be improved with better integration for tools."
"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."
"SwaggerHub's UI needs to be improved as it looks very old school."
"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."
"It has limited functionality...Unfortunately, some of its features are not what we need."
"SwaggerHub lacks in terms of integrations. They have APIs integrated, and they also have some connectors, but they don't have integration with many of the things that we use. For example, for connecting with SVN, we had to implement external scripts. So, they should work on the integration because currently, we have to work on the integration with our DevOps, continuous delivery, or continuous deployment. It would be great if these integrations are built-in. Mainly, we would like it to integrate with SVN and Jira."
"They don't have different URLs for administrators."
"The interface needs to be modernized and made more user friendly so the product continues to have a growing community of users."
"Integration is an area that needs to be improved."
"WSO2 API Manager can be improved a lot relating to usability"
"API Manager is not easy to scale because some of its components lack scalability. It's a difficult point. Especially because companies are so cloud-based these days, microservice scalability is a major thing."
"I would improve the product documentation. There are some gaps, and it can be difficult to find the proper documentation for the product if you need to solve something."
"Based on our recent large scaling project, the latency needs to be improved."
"The user interface needs to improve, it is a bit outdated."
SwaggerHub is ranked 13th in API Management with 8 reviews while WSO2 API Manager is ranked 7th in API Management with 33 reviews. SwaggerHub is rated 7.8, while WSO2 API Manager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of SwaggerHub writes "An easy-to-use solution for the entry point of API documentation that needs to introduce some regulatory controls". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WSO2 API Manager writes "Reliable with good capabilities and good support". SwaggerHub is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway and Boomi AtomSphere API Management, whereas WSO2 API Manager is most compared with Apigee, Kong Gateway Enterprise, Amazon API Gateway and Microsoft Azure API Management. See our SwaggerHub vs. WSO2 API Manager 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.