We performed a comparison between Mule Anypoint Platform and webMethods Integration Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The API toolkit is the solution's most valuable aspect at this time, for our organization."
"The monitoring capabilities of this product are very good because of the feedback it supplies in statistics."
"When we talk about the APIs, there are multiple policies one can apply on APIs, like rate limiting policies, OWASP policies, and OWASP security policies, that can be easily configured in Mule Anypoint Platform."
"Overall, it is a pretty good product. It is also very scalable."
"The most valuable features of the Mule Anypoint Platform are the Flex Gateway, API management, easy-to-use, and connectors. Additionally, they are coming out with improvements to the solution when required."
"We are very satisfied with the DevOps support."
"The tool is very capable and offers a high performance. The tool supports batch processing and ETL processing."
"The most valuable feature of Mule Anypoint Platform is rapid development."
"How simple it is to create new solutions."
"Application integrations are offered out-of-the-box, and that is extremely important to us. This is one of the main use cases that we have for it. It is about 60 to 70 percent of the workload in our application today."
"It frankly fills the gap between IT and business by having approval and policy enforcement on each state and cycle of the asset from the moment it gets created until it is retired."
"One valuable feature is that it is event-driven, so when new data is available on the source it can be quickly processed and displayed. Integration is definitely another useful feature, and B2B is one area where webMethods has its own unique thing going, whereby we can do monitoring of transactions, monitoring of client onboarding, and so on."
"Ease of implementation and flexibility to hold the business logic are the most valuable features."
"They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform."
"It's obvious that the heart of the product lies here. It's comprised of all aspects of ESB (Enterprise Gateway, Adapter, TN, Java) and BPM (task, rules engine)."
"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."
"The cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required, especially when compared to other tools, like Dell Boomi or Oracle."
"Code quality, Code Security, SaaS, and DaaS security, can all be improved."
"Price-wise, it is a good product since it is reasonably priced...Mule Anypoint Platform can get too complex for non-technical people."
"The compatibility with vendors can be improved. Microsoft Azure heavily uses single software."
"In order to set up a storefront, we currently rely on a third-party solution. It would greatly enhance our operations if this feature was integrated into their existing solution."
"It doesn't work well when you try using it for the processing layer."
"I would like to see some data integration and automation."
"What I hear from my customers is that it's very expensive compared to the cost of other integration suites. The cost keeps increasing. MuleSoft should come up with customization factors by using a different way of getting the cost-related stuff to attract customers. That is, they should come up with some cost optimizations."
"We'd like for them to open up to a more cloud-based solution that could offer more flexibility and maybe a better rules engine or more integration with rules engines."
"This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support."
"The product needs to be improved in a few ways. First, they need to stabilize the components of the whole platform across versions. Also, they should stop replacing old components with brand new ones and, rather, improve by evolution."
"It is quite expensive."
"The product must add more compatible connectors."
"On the monitoring side of things, the UI for monitoring could be improved. It's a bit cumbersome to work with."
"Version control is not very easy. The packages and the integration server are on Eclipse IDE, but you can't compare the code from the IDE. For example, if you are working on Java code, doing version control and deployment for a quick comparison between the code isn't easy. Some tools or plug-ins are there, such as CrossVista, and you can also play with an SVN server where you have to place your package, and from there, you can check, but you have to do that as a separate exercise. You can't do it from the IDE or webMethods server. You can't just right-click and upload your service."
"As webMethods Integration Server is expensive, that's its area for improvement."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Mule Anypoint Platform is ranked 3rd in Cloud Data Integration with 41 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. Mule Anypoint Platform is rated 8.2, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Mule Anypoint Platform writes "Robust, reliable, and stable, ensuring high availability for critical integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". Mule Anypoint Platform is most compared with MuleSoft Composer, Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, Oracle Integration Cloud Service, SAP Process Orchestration and SAP Cloud Platform, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi iPaaS. See our Mule Anypoint Platform vs. webMethods Integration Server report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Data Integration 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.
