MuleSoft API Manager Reviews

Our primary use case is for connecting IT systems between each other. Because there are so many interconnections. It makes the connection easy to manage and simplify.

The developer portal is easy to integrate. It is easy to use, easy to integrate, and I like the developer portal.

I would like to see more automation. Our operations are mainly between the IT applications and manual site transfer. Operations are done manually. It should also automate in the operation.

It's new, you could say that we're beginners. 

The stability is good. They are powerful products.

The initial setup was easy.

The price is a bit expensive. It's hard to budget.

I would rate Mulesoft an eight out of ten. Not a ten because of the pricing. 

I would recommend it.

I have API experience with the entire lifecycle using Mulesoft.

This solution is widely used in API integration and there are many different use cases for it.

The most important features are the API management and API development.

I don't think that Mulesoft is doing an extremely good job.

The Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is too heavy and some platforms are difficult to integrate with. The API gateway and API runtime are too heavy, which means that it is not suitable for microservices.

I have been using the Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager for three or four years.

I have been in touch with technical support.

I have a great deal of API experience and I feel that Mulesoft could be doing better. It may be that my standards are a little bit high.

The initial setup is straightforward. From a management point of view, it is okay.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

My primary use case for the solution is as an API gateway. I am an enterprise integration consultant and I implement it for customers.

I would say one of the more valuable features is the stability of the platform. The API gateways across the market end up exposing more or less the same functionality when it comes to the mediation exposure of the proxies. It was decent to work with it even though there weren't many stand out features. The user interface is consistent across all of the products. It's difficult to differentiate APG from IBM Connect or MuleSoft Anypoint platform. They have a rich user interface. 

I think while trying to evaluate the various products on the market, and what could be improved, I'm looking at the indications and analytics and the off-the-shelf dashboards that come with it. Those are things that really catch the eye. At the end of the day, it's the functionalities and the way they integrate with the multi-cloud platforms and other backends that are underpinning the hood. If I have to present an API solution to somebody and if I can show them what are the off-the-shelf dashboards that you get in the analytics profile, that becomes a major eye-catcher to take the discussion forward.

I've been using the solution for a year or so. 

Stability is very good. 

I would think scalability depends on whether you're doing it on premises or on the cloud. I don't have experience with that but I think, for example, since Kong is more into clustering and the like, so scalability in Kong should be more straightforward because it's more evenly distributed. 

I haven't contacted technical support but I have been in touch with some of its engineers and they were a pleasure to deal with. They're good engineers and they are very helpful.

In terms of initial setup, of course WSO2 with Kong is more simple than this.

The advice I would give is that this is a platform that's meant for a complete digital transformation of an organization. If you want to realize the entire capacity or the entire power of the platform with the capability APIs and the system APIs, you know you've got to use the API-led connectivity. And here I think lies the true power of the platform; that instead of using it just as an API gateway, you can take it further and I think that is the real value that market peers are not able to offer. It's a standout feature of the API platform and MuleSoft.

I make proposals and whether the customer chooses it or not is up to them. I usually look at  different products, and then we try and see what fits the customer best. It's not black or white. If there is a need for an entire landscape of low APIs and not just proxies, I think MuleSoft is a good way to go.

I would rate this product an eight out of 10. 

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

Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager has many use cases that involve API integration.

The most valuable features are API development and API management. 

From a management point of view, this solution is okay. It is more lightweight than the runtime module.

The most important thing that should be improved is that it is too heavy. Even the API gateway and the API runtime are too heavy, which makes it more difficult to integrate. With the talk of microservice nowadays, this is something that needs to be improved.

It is not very easy to integrate into other platforms, such as those from IBM.

I have been using the Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager for between three and four years.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Frankly speaking, I don't think that Mulesoft is doing an extremely good job. It may be because it's not that easy to satisfy me from an API point of view, whether in development, maintenance, or management. I have been working in this area for quite a long time and my standards are a little bit high. That said, this is a competitive market and I understand that it is not easy to make a good product.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

The primary use case is for partners to exchange data and information with our company. It can be board members, as well as customers that can connect with us in order to exchange data. 

Overall the platform is good. The stability of the platform is very good. The entire solution has worked well for us. 

Whenever there was an issue, the support was excellent. 

I work with the solution more from a strategy perspective. I don't get into the day to day of how it is run and things like that so I'm not sure if I'd be able to get into features or what may be missing.

The pricing is quite expensive. It should be adjusted to make it more affordable for users.

When they come up with a completely new version of the solution and there is no direct upgrade for the customer from the older version to the new version there's a lot of work to be done. Whatever time and money you have invested cannot be directly used in the new platform.

When they come up with a new version release or a new platform the customers, existing requirements, etc. should be transferred over easier. Migration every time there is a new version is difficult. It's something that they could fix.

I've been using the solution for the last three years.

The stability of the solution is excellent.

The scalability of the solution is very good.

We've found technical support to be excellent. We've been very satisfied with the level of service that the solution provides.

The initial setup isn't complex, although when you are installing the solution you need a moderate amount of competency.

Deployment took about six months.

The licensing costs for the solution are quite high.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Mainly the pricing is the big down-side of the solution. 

I'd advise others to ensure that they need to have the right partner who understands the system before they get into the implementation process.

My primary use case is investigating the pros and cons of different platforms for the benefit of the application lifecycle. This includes security and other aspects. One of my goals is to make it easier to create API inventories.

The most valuable feature is the ability to investigate APIs.

The interface could be made more user-friendly.

Better documentation to help explain each of the features would be really helpful.

I have been using Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager for about six months.

I have not needed to contact technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward. The length of time required for deployment varies based on the requirements. It is not always the same, but the average is a few hours.

I implemented this solution.

This is a good solution but nothing is perfect and there is always room for improvement.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Functional:  Integrate Supply Chain automation; Financial System integrations

Technical: Expose API's to Trading Partners

It's provided a complete and architecturally sound solution for building publicly facing API's that can be consumed and invoked by client-side devices, such as mobile. Calling APIs from JavaScript sounds easy, but it must be secure and performance driven. Mulesoft allows for that.

Integrating cloud to cloud or SaaS to on premise has its considerations, and Mulesoft improves the development, design, and implementation of integrating federated systems and datastores across clouds, networks, and domains.

• Ability to create and test API "microservices" using RAML
• Develop policies that can be applied and re-used across API's and trading partners
• Strong security and integration to identity providers to protect public facing APIs
• Intuitive development tools based on fundamental computer science concepts, drag/drop
• Simple cloud and hybrid cloud deployment models. Good security by putting each application onto a separate VM in the cloud.
• Large set of connectors
• Innovative concept with "Connector Marketplace" which is similar to Salesforce.
• Solid integration with DevOps and continuous integration tools.
• Good build for its transformation, translation, and orchestration features. For example, visual mapping, an IDE for building visual flows, drag and drop connectors and templates.

• Mulesoft doesn't provide a complete stack. For example, it doesn't have BPM/Workflow, BAM, or Identity Management products.
• The User Interfaces on the Mulesoft tools aren't as nice as some of it's competitors.
• Improved business level analytics is currently on the roadmap.
• We created a framework for transaction management since one is not provided out of the box.

There have been no stability issues.

Good scalability in AWS/EC2.

Customer Service:

10/10 - They have a very strong customer success and professional services team.

Technical Support:

9/10 - They're very quick to help with tickets and deploy fixes.

I have used Software AG webMethods and Oracle SOA Suite at other customers, but none have switched.

I've implemented it both ways. Their vendor team is 10/10 for their RapidStart program to help customer with their initial use cases.

Consider cloud vs. on-premise. Have a good vision of your medium term needs so you can plan for growth. Develop an API/integration roadmap

For API we looked at Apigee, Axway, Mashery, and CA Layer 7.

For ESB/SOA we looked at SAG webMethods, and IBM.

Our approach is to know your use cases (through workshops), and map them back to vendor capabilities to scorecard the platforms.

The product is very lightweight and easy to setup, build and deploy APIs.

As a B2B2C company, our goal is to provide a clean interface to our systems. With Anypoint API Manager we have been able to quickly develop a standard API gateway. Plus, we developed a custom API solution for our key client by reusing most of the components.

Load balancing may be an area of improvement.

Two years.

No issues.

No.

No.

Good level, they respond quickly and escalate as well if needed.

Technical support is part of Mulesoft professional services, so it's not included in the solution.

No, setup has been easy, we setup a whole stack dev to production within a business day.

We implemented it in-house.

It's a per core pricing, maybe if your number of cores raise up quickly prices can escalate.

Apache Camel and TIBCO. TIBCO was much more expensive than Mulesoft and not so easy to configure. Apache Camel lacked of web management console.