MuleSoft API Manager Reviews

The solution is basically a SOAP API and REST API.

The solution is very flexible. It's a great aspect of the solution for us.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is good. It's passable. 

The pricing is a bit expensive. It would be better if they offered more price-conscious licensing.

I've been using the solution for a couple of years at this point. It's been a while now. I have some experience with it.

The solution is stable. It's good. There are no bugs or glitches and it does not crash or freeze. The performance has been good. 

The solution can scale if a company needs to expand it. It's pretty good. 

We have 30 people using the solution right now. 

We've contacted technical support and they are very helpful and responsive. They're good. I'm satisfied with the level of service provided to customers. 

We also use Tencent which is just more compatible with enterprise architecture.

I'm not overly familiar with the initial setup, however, my understanding is that it is an average level of difficulty. It's not overly simple or complex. 

We have four people that can handle maintenance duties. They are managers and admins. 

We used a consultant to assist us in the implementation process. 

The pricing could be better.

We pay a licensing fee on a monthly basis. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's good. I've enjoyed using it.

I would recommend the solution to others. It's a good platform. 

We use it for integration with backend applications. We use it to connect to applications like SAP databases, or Infomatica Collibra or MongoDB, and some other backend applications.

One good thing about MuleSoft, is that they have a lot of connectors to those backend applications. We don't really need to write code to be able to connect to a database or to connect with SAP. You just need credentials and the connectivity details. Most of the development of what we do is just drag and drop. They're able to connect with applications using standard connectors that are provided by ESB, by MuleSoft.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

The solution has been very stable.

Technical support has been great.

If you want to see the full-fledged functionality of their analytics engine, you have to pay separately for that. It's not the case with, for example, Apigee. That is out of the box. For MuleSoft, then you need to specifically pay an additional licensing fee be able to get the benefits of the analytics.

It would be ideal if they had full-fledged features out of the box versus having to pay for them separately. 

I have five years of experience using this product.

The product offers a very stable platform. We've had a couple of issues, however, it's a stable platform overall. Due to the API, there may be some buggy codes. We have not had any major issues, and, if we do, the technical support is very responsive to our queries.  

Technical support has been excellent. Whenever we've had to contend with a bug, they have been very helpful at assisting us. We're very satisfied with their level of service. They are extremely responsive and very knowledgeable.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's much more straightforward, that, for example, Apigee, which is more difficult to execute.

The product added a lot of value to the organization. Usually, all integrations are point to point. For example, if Informatica needs the information from SAP or SAP from PeopleSoft,  they have point to point connection. Due to the fact that we are able to handle connectivity using MuleSoft, it's actually reusable for applications. Therefore, once we connect to SAP, we don't need to deal with that connectivity again. Any other application that needs to connect to SAP reuses the same API that we have developed on this platform. They don't really need to develop a new set of API.

The solution makes users pay integration fees.

You need to pay extra to get proper analytics. It's a separate fee.

MuleSoft has both ESB as well as the API management platform. 

We are implementors.

We are one major version behind. We are not using the latest version of the solution.

We deploy on-prem and we also have deployment on our own AWS OSSIE code infrastructure.

It might be cheaper for someone to implement MuleSoft on-prem rather than on the cloud. With the on-prem version, we can deploy as many applications as we want on the on-prem version, provided the infrastructure is able to support it. However, for cloud-based deployments, they end up charging more.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

We are solution integrators and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients.

It is used for integrating and logging data from legacy systems to make it available for other systems within the IT infrastructure in the enterprise. It is also used for data migration and making it available for customers, devices, services, and so on.

Essentially, it is for data governance and API governance.

The most valuable things about this solution are how it is implemented and managed, and that it is vendor-free.

For system integrators and analysts, it is pretty clear how this system works.

The documentation is great; it is always up to date and well-presented. If any details are missing then there is a blog available that contains a lot of details. There are also channels on YouTube to help you better understand the solution and what some of the processes look like.

The initial setup is very complex.

I have been using the MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager for two years.

This solution is stable but it is important to remember that it is the glue between other systems that might have issues with instability. The MuleSoft platform connects all of the systems together and collects data from different sources to create new types of data and new statistics.

In general, it is used on a daily basis and most of the time, it's stable.

Scalability is perfect. The API Manager is used by large clients and is made to be scaled.

I have never been in contact with technical support. It is not often that something goes wrong.

I have worked with other API management systems such as those by Kong and Tyk. Each vendor has its own functionality that you need to know about so that you can work with effectively.

The initial setup is complex compared to solutions such as Kong or Tyk. There are many things to keep in mind concerning configuration, features, and different options for different systems. I would say that overall, it is very complex.

When all of the requirements are well defined, well described, clear, and consistent, the implementation is fast and can be done in a matter of weeks.

Maintenance only needs to be done when there is a change in business or operational processes. Also, there are some updates that are required but usually not many.

The licensing fees are approximately $80,000 USD per year and there are costs for additional functionality, as well as premiums for connectors to systems such as Oracle and SAP.  You're not obligated but it is better to buy premium and official connectors, although they cost approximately $25,000 per year.

My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is to first make sure that there are no alternatives that are most cost-effective, such as open-source products. Many of them are much cheaper but are still able to provide the same relevant functionality and the same level of data security.

I would say that MuleSoft has the best API manager but it is not the cheapest one and as such, not for everybody. It is not everyone who needs to connect expensive systems together.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We do business with a lot of other vendors and customers. Our main core business is to lend loans and lease furniture. In this context, we have to create partners and we have to do multiple transactions with multiple vendors and multiple facilitators. In this venture, we consider APIs the best, and our most sophisticated medium to communicate with other partners and other lenders at home and elsewhere.

We want APIs to be the most sophisticated and more robust. REST APIs are the core in this area. We have been using Mulesoft specifically to create our REST APIs, enlarge them, and also expose the endpoints to our vendors so that they can use them. Internally, we have been using the APIs extensively for all of our internal application communication. Raw ping and workflow and all those things. We use this Mulesoft extensively for API management, REST API stack, and also for the workflow.

We're going to have a task with another bank who will be lending us the loan or they will be giving us some money for us so that we can lend this to double customers and expand into different industries. We're doing the business directly with those banks who we're really trying to work with, and doing joint collaboration so that we can lend loans to the customers, the retail customers.

In this context, we have to collaborate with those banks in a sophisticated way. Few banks are very, very advanced in the necessary technology. We propose of them usage of the APIs. The advanced banks already have the APIs. That kind is a very smooth transition, but the banks whom we're working with, a couple of small banks, don't have the API stack. Whatever the legal systems they have, we enforce them to convert those existing legacy systems as the APIs, and also those other REST APIs, and we can have a smooth transition.

The initiative went very well, and they're very happy with a lot of the tasks we have been doing. Now, they have extended the business. They want to censor their existing systems. They want to expand their system. This is one of the examples of how the solution has improved our organization. In this juncture, we place Mulesoft as one of the core solutions in our organization API stack. Communicating with one application and other application, or the validation of the loan ID or the validation of a customer or generating the customer base, whatever it is. For the day to day tasks, we use API systems only. API is one of the most crucial parts of the IT initiatives which are going down in our office on a day to day business.

The ESB, the enterprise service bus is what we primarily use. In addition to that, the API management. These are the two tools which we have been using extensively. The enterprise platform. 

I don't think that it's a negative, but one of the biggest things is this: when they were merging with Salesforce they never said anything about that, they did not give any positive or negative news. They were just silent about that. I think there's something clandestine has been happening over there. I'd like to know what is the future roadmap of Mulesoft is after it got merged with Salesforce.

Nobody is giving proper information because I called a couple of Mulesofters and they're not giving information. I don't know whether they're naïve, or they don't want to disclose about whatever it is. That is the first thing they have to address. If they don't address probably they'll lose a lot of their customer base, so they must have to address that.

Also, in regards to near future resellers - they have to increase the capabilities for the Kubernetes, for continuous integration. Mostly you can call the DevOps. Still, now there are some gaps out there they have to address for the DevOps capability like continuous integration exclusively for the Kubernetes and Docker. They say that they have complained, but I asked for realistic examples and concerns, and still very few things have to be addressed. That is the first thing that they're going to have to address probably. I had some discussions with those people there. 

The second thing is they're mostly focusing on the security. I think security plays a vital role in going forward in regards to API stack. Not only for the API stack, but also for the enterprise service capabilities in which security plays a vital role. They're adding a lot of security capabilities over there. That is also one other thing I hope they continue to work on in the future.

In addition to that, they're going to add a lot of additional plugins. Plugins in the sense they compiled from Salesforce and a couple of other applications, but they have to address a few more applications. They should take a cue from Webex Desk. If everybody is using Webex Desk, every third-party application, and they want to communicate with Mulesoft, they don't have any plugins. They have worked a lot on the plugins. 

Lastly, regarding the streaming of data. In terms of streaming of data, I don't rely on Mulesoft. Whenever they do new data streaming or any streaming, the conceptual architecture connects to us, like data streaming and also for video streaming. Because the streaming capabilities are very minimal they don't stream. The capability was not there.

I heard that they're addressing this issue, probably in the next couple of months. They're going to address this issue. If they are, then I think this will be one of their biggest achievements. I think it will impact their business and also their challenge. It will impact the whole pipeline also, so they can accumulate more customers.

I've been using the solution for two years.

The solution is a stable one. But as the API stack has been increasing, whenever the new stack is saving, at the end of the day we have got our own Kubernetes to connect the APIs completely. The capacity has been increasing day by day, so we have to increase the capacity. We have to do so regularly. At least quarterly, we have to do some capacity planning for that. It's not cost-effective and it's got a cost impact too. We have to invest something around a few thousand dollars to enhance this capability.

Their method is not cost-effective. It's some costly, but for the performance and the overall customers who are using our APIs and what we're doing internally, we're happy with that. The organization is ready to bear that cost, but our only concern is they have to address our tasks. Whenever we seek their assistance they should address our task quickly. They should not insist to us that somebody from there will show up and do some due diligence. I think that is not required for all the customers because we feel that we're mature enough to tackle our own Mulesoft, whatever the day to day usage is concerned. We don't need their assistance anymore.

If we need them we will definitely put in some clear understanding that we need their assistance. But in future, we might only need assistance for Docker and Kubernetes because we're having some challenges over here. Or, in relation to security, we might need their assistance. 

It's highly scalable. It's a good technology. We have to increase and plan the capacity in advance. We have to execute our IP partly with other business because our business is very aggressive and very highly patent-oriented. To meet our business expectations, our IT stack has to be more efficient and more robust. We have to scale our business acumen in a very aggressive way. At this juncture, what we have to do is make our technologies or our applications more scalable and more persistent and continuously integrated. At this point of time, the features are being generously added. But there should give some flashpoints or something like that because the capacity has been missing.

I'm not sure whether we don't know how to configure those features or not. We're naïve about those features or maybe Mulesoft does not have them, but whenever we end up with this capacity, it has been going down, then we have to do a lot of due diligence and we have to do some capacity planning, which means we have to do some fibering, which has happened three to four times over a period of the last two years. We want to reduce that because it might impact our business. Because we have aggressive targets and loan book should be more, or I'll say we're expecting more from the customers.

At this point in time, our API stacks have been more supportive and more resilient. Mulesoft never gave any problem, but to scale up to this kind of capability, yes, we have to do some fibering but everything is going well, fortunately.

In terms of usage, I can say 1,000 to 2,000 users on day to day basis, because we have got a very big call center. They're not aware that they're using these APIs, but previously the APIs randomly show. I can say around 2,000 users are there. I'm talking about business users, not technical enrollment.

We want to scale up the user count, and want to increase our loan book on a regular basis. We're enhancing and emphasizing most on our digital capability so that a lot of customers who are entitled to and get to enroll as our customers, will be rendered loans. They will get paid online. Lots of things are new here. Innovations are being added and getting added in the near future. The customer base will also be increasing, so to make this happen, we have to scale our capabilities, and we have to meet our increasing customer base.

I don't oversee the Mulesoft activities on a day-by-day because I work on the enterprise architecture security. We rarely go and focus on Mulesoft but whenever we ask them any questions, rather than addressing the question, they completely answer in such a way that they will do some due diligence. Somebody will show up at our premises, and they'll send some statement of work or something like that.

They want to turn every question into a business. I understand business is not a charity. But at least, being customer service, something you have to understand through the customer perspective, is that customers are expecting to do some due diligence and that you understand the customer complaint correctly, and then address their concerns. If there really is any business potential there, then you can address that.

Rather than jumping into the business wagon initially, they should understand the concern. They should understand the issue, and they try to address that, then if they really feel that there's business, or they have a business opportunity out there, they can capitalize that. Nobody is refusing that.

Rather than focusing on numbers, they should focus more on the customer support service.

I don't think the company had a prior solution. Our IT stack has been matured from 2015 onwards. Gradually it's getting scaling up. In 2015 our company used to work on spreadsheets. IT stack was being set up in 2015. In 2016, we censored all our spreadsheets and all those things, and we brought Salesforce into our company so that all the call centers on the branch associates who disperse the loans, who grant and pursue the loans have been using that. Once the Salesforce has been established, gradually we found that API as one of the most innovative thing.

We brought APIs. First, initially we did some Java-enabled APIs, but we found that it was going to be consuming a lot of time and energy, so thought rather an API management product may be viable. We brought Mulesoft. I think somewhere around the beginning of 2017 we brought Mulesoft. 

Before joining the team, most of Mulesoft had already been initiated. But what I realized was that most of my colleagues and supervisors don't have the API experience. Secondly, even though they have the experience, Mulesoft gives a lot of tutorials on their website, but most of them are not self-explanatory. They insist that customers find a Mulesoft expert, mostly because they seek the assistance from the Mulesoft consulting group to come on board and do some due diligence, and then you will hear, "Somebody will come and install it." That is what they have been doing over a period of time. I think that this process is still continuing. I don't think that's been stopped.

So, we had a challenge with configuring initially when we installed Mulesoft, but you really have to understand the concepts of Mulesoft, and if you follow the regulatory and follow the manual if you have a little bit of experience, I think it's not a big deal. You can configure Mulesoft very efficiently.

In terms of the implementation strategy, initially, we were blindly following whatever the Mulesoft consultants said. They had been talking about creating your architecture, and this is what was involved in the deployment methodology. For almost one and one and a half year, we have been following them. Lately, we've changed the strategy, and we've customized our deployment strategy. We merged with Kubernetes, Jenkins, and we have JIRA inside our organization.

To make our customization comply with Docker and Kubernetes, it took some amount of time, but it consumes a bit amount of time to configure all these items within the Mulesoft and run it. It took around three to four months of time to complete this exercise because we struggled with the documents. They're not as explanatory as they should be. Also, whenever we tried to reach out the Mulesoft, they said that they would come out and they would do it, and they would do some consulting. But they would charge more. To avoid extra cost, we did our own exercise, and frankly speaking, the tutorials are not self-explanatory. The majority of this Docker and Kubernetes is not as mature as it should be when compared with Apigee. Apigee is very fast. 

Going forward, we're going to migrate all of our applications to Azure. That has also hasn't been addressed yet. But the concern has already been raised. I don't know when they're going to address it. Yeah, these are the challenges. The tutorials, whatever they give, is not self-explanatory. It takes a lot of time to build any new initiative as far as Mulesoft is concerned.

We already have our full development center. The email team is there who've been supporting us. We have an internal workforce in there we've been doing. Along with me, there are two more architects who report to me. They do their job, and one dedicated Mulesoft integration architect, I can say the solution architect, but she supports the Mulesoft activities. The Mulesoft delivery manager is there. They're checking this challenge. They're accepting this challenge, and we're looking all those things.

We had help with implementation by Mulesoft.

I cannot give you any figures because frankly speaking we never measured anything, but I can say that it has made a significant contribution. 

I'm unsure about licensing costs because I'm not the person who handles this. But, ballpark, it's probably somewhere around $300,000-$400,000 or something like that.

There are a lot of products available on the market. Mulesoft is very good. It's an amazing product, no doubt about it. There's quality in the standard version, and the acumen and the technology are very good. What I want to tell them is before going for Mulesoft to consider Apigee. There are a couple of open-sources out there. What I would suggest is to not go blindly with the product stack. If you want to use the APIs, understanding of APIs are must because no company is independent. They have to do business with other companies. API is one of the most standard and robust methodologies to communicate with other business and do the business for the day to day transactions. And API is one of the most friendly approaches.

In this juncture, before going with an API management solution, understand whether you can create your own in-house APIs and see if you can leverage on that based on for the timelines and the costs. Then you can examine your goals because not every company is the same. Product due diligence is must especially when you do business with huge numbers of customers. For those kinds of numbers, you have to do an aggressive and some scale due diligence before going for the product.

My suggestion is to do due diligence and find the registered products, which are capable, and customizable for your requirements. Then you go with that product. As far as Mulesoft is concerned, yes, most of the small-scale and medium-scale customers, yes, it is one of the best tools. But when you scale up for large-scale customers, it has got those capabilities, but the Mulesoft team is not addressing those capabilities.

With Apigee, they address the concern and they go after a solution, and have a different approach, whereas, with Mulesoft, they insist the customers follow their methodology, which may or may not be suitable for all the lines of businesses. But when you come to the Apigee, they tailor to vendors, they customize themselves and act as the business owner, and they make for the business one of the best solutions. That's the difference.

However, I'm sure that what Apigee can do, Mulesoft can do better. But they have to address these concerns. To address these concerns, they should publish more articles, and the tutorials should be updated. The tutorials and the knowledge base should be updated thoroughly, and it should be made available for all the customers, as well as new learners.

Generally, they can make their product more sellable. It should not be hidden. I feel that is one of the challenges they have been facing, and they're not addressing that over a period of time.

I would rate this solution at 8 or 8.5 out of 10.

I work for customers in the retail and estate industries. We primarily use the solution to automate HR-related business processes. It includes interactions with the customers, making dashboards for customers, product to cash, and some other actions.

I mainly focus on the development part where I take requirements from the customers and consult with my technical architect, trying to translate the business requirements into actual technical solutions. Their development environment is good.

I also play the role of a technical architect, but this depends on the project requirements and customer requirements. In case they need consultation, I try to provide my expertise.

The issues are largely dependent on the scalability of the applications. Some solutions are created for larger customers or clients. Building an application that can be flexible and can be used at any scale is necessary. 

I have been using Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager for the last two years.

MuleSoft offers two kinds of solutions for customers, a MuleSoft-hosted one and a customer-hosted one.

If the customer chooses the MuleSoft-hosted platform, the licensing will be negotiated.

But if the platform is custom-built to your application, the cost won't be that high. Clients usually have their own servers.

It is not a very scalable solution. 

The customer support is good.

Positive

I previously worked on Barracato, an IPaaS tool that is mainly used to handle integration and automation issues.

Mulesoft is good compared to the other integration platforms.

The installation is abstracted and complex from the user's point of view. But MuleSoft provides support. It is somehow abstract, but for the customers, the integration and setup are simple processes.

It depends on different kinds of platforms, customer-hosted platforms, or new self-hosted platforms. If you are going with a new self-hosted platform, then there isn’t much to be done. It's very easy to set up.

But if you're going with a customer infrastructure or a customer-hosted platform, then it depends on the customer's settings and the teams. It involves time to set up the infrastructure. They need a platform and a landscape so that they can deploy it.

MuleSoft has a lot of maintenance solutions that help the applications notify or trigger alerts whenever any error occurs or is encountered in the application. It can be leveraged, making maintenance easy. 

Both the cloud and on-premises options are available. Customers can leverage the MuleSoft Cloud platform to deploy the applications or set up their own online infrastructure to deploy applications. There is another solution available that can be used to leverage some of the other cloud platforms, like Azure, CCP, or AWS. This can be used to integrate with cloud platforms so that applications can be deployed. 

I would advise customers that instead of building their infrastructure from scratch, they should choose MuleSoft Anypoint API.

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten due to some scalability and pricing issues.

I deploy this solution for my clients. 

This is a good API management product, applying the policies, doing the integrations. I deploy both the cloud and the on-premise solution depending on the client's requirements. 

If they were to develop on MuleSoft it would be a good way of improving API monetization. Together with that I'd like to see the developer portal. It currently comes with a Salesforce connection but it could be integrated better.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable, we have customers in both the medium and enterprise environments. 

The technical support is reasonable. They respond to us promptly. 

The initial setup is fine for the cloud version but very complex for the on-prem deployment. 

Licensing costs are reasonable. 

Anyone planning to use this product should invest in some training beforehand. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

We use MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager across our integration team to move existing integrations and implement APIs. We are system integrators and I'm vice president of the company.

I like the approach of MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and the kind of integration and flexibility it offers. The solution solves the flexibility of ALITAN, TODO1, and APA gameplay, it's a prominent feature that offers good value.

The solution is not open source and the market is now open with a lot of options customers can test to explore and investigate. I think the code is something we need to explore. I think licensing costs should be reduced, it's quite expensive. 

I have been using MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager for over four years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The initial setup is not completely straightforward but it's not too complex either. 

The solution is quite expensive. 

In our work, we carry out a deeper analysis of customer requirements. Based on their fixed rate product capabilities, the size of the organization, and the business case, we carry out an evaluation and propose a unique solution. We have our own evaluation process, which is quite extensive and includes architect scalability of configuration, maintainability, and then commercial licensing. Taking into account all those parameters we can figure out the best possible solution. It really depends on what the customer needs. 

I rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

Our primary use is the interconnectivity of exposed APIs. The transformation layer is huge on the MuleSoft platform.

The most valuable feature is the scalability.

With respect to the live help, I have language issues because I can't understand some of the things that I hear.

I just recently completed the Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager training, and have just begun working to get things set up. I am still learning my way around the platform.

My company has two active connections.

Stability-wise, it has been excellent.

Scalability is one of the key features of this solution. We're just at the beginning so we do plan on increasing usage.

Technical support for this product is excellent.

The resources are out there.

The initial setup is complex.

We deployed with our in-house team.

Our largest return on investment is a specific use case called Digital Account Opening. As a financial services firm, this is a process that entails paperwork, fax machines, and so on. With the implementation of this solution, it's going to be automatic.

The pricing is very expensive, although you get a lot of power from the product. We're just scratching the surface of it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.