We performed a comparison between Red Hat Fuse 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."The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing."
"I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. We are an enterprise business."
"The initial setup process is quite straightforward."
"I found it was quite easy to set up and implement."
"We use it because it is easy to integrate with any other application...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution nine out of ten."
"This solution's adaptability to our use case has helped us integrate our systems seamlessly."
"One of the features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse is that it has a lot of containers so you won't have to worry about load balancing. In the past, there was a cut-off, but nowadays, Red Hat Fuse is moving off of that, so my team is utilizing it the most for load balancing, particularly running goal applications and three to five containers. There's automatic load balancing so you won't have to worry too much. I also found that component-wise, you don't have to do much coding in Red Hat Fuse because everything is configurable, for example, XML-based coding. Coding isn't that difficult. Performance-wise, I also found the solution to be quite good and its processing is quite fast. My team is processing a huge amount of data with the help of Red Hat Fuse."
"The most valuable feature is the software development environment."
"It’s fairly easy to view, move, and mange access across different components. Different component types are categorized and can be viewed in a web based administration console."
"It's very flexible and a good platform to use."
"Given that you have one integration API in place, it takes very minimal effort to scale it to any other application that might want to use the same. Its flow-based development environment is a breeze and makes it really easy to re-use most of the existing components and build up a new API."
"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is the built-in monitoring, auditing, RETS, and SOAP services."
"What I found most valuable in webMethods Integration Server is that it's a strong ESB. It also has strong API modules and portals."
"The solution's ease-of-use is its most valuable feature, in which complex issues may be resolved."
"Best feature is Insight for monitoring, and as a debugging tool. It has saved us a lot of time during crisis situations."
"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."
"The documentation for Fuse can be improved because, while it is very detailed and extensive, it is not too intuitive for someone that has to deliver some kind of troubleshooting services. In particular, for installation, re-installation, or upgrades, I find that the documentation can be improved."
"Red Hat is not easy to learn. You can learn it but you sometimes need external expertise to implement solutions."
"The monitoring experience should be better."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Fuse is the deployment process because it's still very heavy. It's containerized, but now with Spring Boot and other microservices-related containers, deployment is still very heavy. Red Hat Fuse still has room for improvement in terms of becoming more containerized and more oriented."
"While it's a good platform, the pricing is a bit high."
"My company doesn't have any experience with other messaging tools, so it's difficult to mention what areas could be improved in Red Hat Fuse, but it could be pricing because I find it expensive."
"The main issue with Red Hat Fuse is the outdated and scattered documentation."
"Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible."
"This product has too many gaps. You find them after update installations. This should be covered by automatic testing."
"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."
"Technical support is an area where they can improve."
"The price should be reduced to make it more affordable."
"It could be more user-friendly."
"webMethods Integration Server needs to add more adapters."
"The market webMethods Integration Server falls under is a very crowded market, so for the product to stand out, Software AG would need to get traction in the open source community by releasing a new version or a base version and open source it, so people can create new custom components and add it to the portfolio."
"It is quite expensive."
More webMethods Integration Server Pricing and Cost Advice →
Red Hat Fuse is ranked 4th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 23 reviews while webMethods Integration Server is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 60 reviews. Red Hat Fuse is rated 8.2, while webMethods Integration Server is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Red Hat Fuse writes "Configurable, doesn't require much coding, and has an automatic load balancing feature, but its development features need improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods Integration Server writes "Event-driven with lots of helpful formats, but minimal learning resources available". Red Hat Fuse is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM Integration Bus, Oracle Service Bus, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and JBoss ESB, whereas webMethods Integration Server is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods.io Integration, Mule ESB, TIBCO BusinessWorks and Boomi iPaaS. See our Red Hat Fuse 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.
With webMethods Integration Server, you have the power to connect anything faster, thanks to open, standards-based integration. Make custom, packaged and mainframe applications and databases—on-premises and in the cloud—interoperable and assure the fluid flow of data across your automated processes. Mapping and transformation functions are built-in.
pro's; Easy scalability, 300+ connectors, Faster integrations, "Lift & shift" integrations, Mapping and transformation & iPaaS integrations in the cloud
Where Red Hat Fuse, pros; Hybrid deployment, Built-in iPaaS with low-code UI/UX, Container-based integration & Integration everywhere supporting 200 included connectors.
Red Hat Fuse, based on open source communities like Apache Camel and Apache ActiveMQ, is part of an agile integration solution. Its distributed approach allows teams to deploy integrated services where required. The API-centric, container-based architecture decouples services so they can be created, extended, and deployed independently.
Hello Andhika
Please read Dave's reply first and understand that WebMethods offers many features that you will not find in RedHat Fuse.
I would like to add one more architectural point of view.
WebMethods provides a nice business process engine that helps you orchestrate your services. Fuse is not able to provide this kind of service.
If your processes are simple and map information, for example, use Fuse.
If your business processes are complex and require balancing, I recommend an integration tool with a business process engine (BPEL or BPMN). WebMethods, Oracle SOA Suite or OpenESB offer these types of tools.
If you plan to design complex processes, you should not hesitate to choose WebMethods.