We performed a comparison between IBM API Connect and SwaggerHub 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."Using API Connect allows us to quickly create proxy APIs and saves time on end-to-end testing, which lets us deliver quickly to clients."
"API Connect's data gateway is one of the strongest in the market."
"The most valuable features are stability and security."
"The support is good and active. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten."
"API Connect is a very good platform for the development of APIs."
"The interface is very nice. It makes the solution easy to use and navigate."
"The most valuable features of IBM API Connect are its performance and user-friendliness."
"This is a very easy to use solution."
"The scalability is endless."
"The tool's most valuable feature is licensing."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"IBM info-center help documentation also needs improvement. Competitive product like Apigee provide out of the box policies to run Javascript, JAVA and better/flexible logging policies."
"The solution is overly complex."
"The solution is not scalable."
"There are some performance issues and issues related to asynchronous APIs."
"Automation for our Domino applications could be improved."
"The administration of the user interface and the technical documentation are areas of concern in the solution where improvements are required."
"API Connect's analytics subsystem could be improved to make it easier to render content from the analytics system and offload it to an external database."
"Installation is weak."
"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."
"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."
"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."
"It has limited functionality...Unfortunately, some of its features are not what we need."
"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice"
"SwaggerHub's UI needs to be improved as it looks very old school."
"SwaggerHub could be improved with better integration for tools."
"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."
IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 73 reviews while SwaggerHub is ranked 16th in API Management with 10 reviews. IBM API Connect is rated 8.0, while SwaggerHub is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM API Connect writes "Good speed and performance, but it's based on a bit dated architecture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SwaggerHub writes "Simplifies API design and development for developers". IBM API Connect is most compared with IBM DataPower Gateway, Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager and Amazon API Gateway, whereas SwaggerHub is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway and Kong Gateway Enterprise. See our IBM API Connect vs. SwaggerHub 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.
