We performed a comparison between Apigee and Oracle API Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Google, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in API Management."The central monitoring feature is the most valuable. It also provides security for the APIs and high availability for our use cases. Apigee is the best product in the industry in comparison to other API management solutions. It helps in fast development, which is a top point. It also supports a lot of industry standards and has excellent documentation."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"The most valuable features of Apigee for me are analytics, security, ease of use, and integration capabilities."
"The following features are most valuable: API Management, Analytics, Quota, and the Developer Portal."
"Apigee has better scalability than WSA."
"The use case which I have installed serves the intended purpose."
"Apigee is very easy to use, and you can code in any language."
"Apigee is a great product with good feedback and recommendations from clients."
"It is very secure, easy to manage, and easy to configure. It is a web-based API. Moreover, we get direct support from Oracle guys."
"The most valuable features for us are security and centralization."
"The security, the authentication, and the publishing qualities are great."
"The initial setup isn't overly difficult."
"Proxy versioning seems a bit confusing/buried in the publishing experience, especially for the URI-based versioning approach."
"iPaaS is something that we would like to see. For example, MuleSoft is kind of an integrated platform as a service (iPaaS), and it provides a lot of out-of-the-box connectors and other such things. This is where Apigee lacks. I'm not sure if that's the roadmap for Apigee, but any improvements on those lines would be helpful where things become easier to implement."
"The solution’s scalability could be improved."
"They need to work on the cost of the solution."
"Apigee is more of an entry level solution that does basic things pretty well, but if you want to go more customizable, you want to really look for another solution."
"Since it is based on various open sourced projects, we might have to depend on the fixes provided by those components rather than Apigee directly fixing the issues."
"The entire user across all the layers should be singly authenticated through an external authentication system."
"I have heard there maybe be some security issues that need to be addressed. If this is the situation I would encourage taking a look at the security matters."
"Oracle should actively seek feedback and tailor the approach to client needs. It shouldn't always be about pushing additional products."
"From an administration and developer point of view, the user interface and user experience are not great."
"Before gaining experience with the product, I found that it was not simple to use and things took longer to do than I had anticipated."
"We'd like it if they could reduce the cost without sacrificing on features."
Apigee is ranked 2nd in API Management with 82 reviews while Oracle API Management is ranked 20th in API Management with 5 reviews. Apigee is rated 8.2, while Oracle API Management is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Apigee writes "Has a robust community and outstanding performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle API Management writes "Provides robust security for financial transactions and protects the ERP database from direct exposure". Apigee is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, IBM API Connect, WSO2 API Manager, Amazon API Gateway and Layer7 API Management, whereas Oracle API Management is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management and IBM API Connect.
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.