We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"The most valuable feature of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is the ability to facilitate communication with legacy systems, offering a multitude of great capabilities. For example, if there is a mainframe system in place with a web service serving as the front end. In that case, the solution enables efficient protocol transformations to convert all request payloads into a format that the legacy systems can accept, rendering the integration and transformation processes seamless and highly effective."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"One [of the most valuable features] is the webMethods Designer. That helps our developers develop on their own. It's very intuitive for design. It helps our developers to speed the development of services for the integrations."
"The product is very stable."
"We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces."
"I feel comfortable using this product with its ease of building interfaces for developers. This is a better integration tool for integrating with various applications like Oracle, Salesforce, mainframes, etc. It works fine in the integration of legacy software as well."
"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."
"What I found most valuable in webMethods Integration Server is that it's a strong ESB. It also has strong API modules and portals."
"It's a visual tool, so our transformations can be quickly implemented without a lot of fuss. The fact that we have an easy way to expose REST services is also very interesting. It offers the possibility to connect over GMS to synchronize message brokers."
"The development is very fast. If you know what you're doing, you can develop something very easily and very fast."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"In terms of scale, I would give it a four out of 10."
"I'd like to see the admin portal for managing the integration server go up a level, to have more capabilities and to be given a more modern web interface."
"t doesn't represent OOP very well, just a method and proprietary interface called IData."
"webMethods Integration Server could improve on the version control. I'm not sure if Web Method has some kind of inbuilt integration with Bitbucket or GitHub or some kind of version control system. However, that's one area where they can improve."
"The initial setup of the webMethods Integration Server is not easy but it gets easier once you know it. It is tiresome but not difficult."
"Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area."
"The stability of the various modules of the product suite have been a bit of a concern lately. Though their support team is always easy to reach out to, I would prefer it not come to that."
"Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 8th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 11 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Message Broker writes "For new applications that are being onboarded, we engage this tool so the data can flow as required but there's some lag in the GUI". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway, IBM BPM and Red Hat Fuse, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Azure Data Factory. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) 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.