Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apache APISIX vs webMethods.io comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache APISIX
Ranking in API Management
17th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in API Management
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
94
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (5th), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (11th), Cloud Data Integration (10th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the API Management category, the mindshare of Apache APISIX is 2.9%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.4%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
webMethods.io2.4%
Apache APISIX2.9%
Other94.7%
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

AB
Associate Consultant at Ernst & Young
User-friendly platform simplifies traffic management and boosts API management through integrated plugins
The most valuable features of Apache APISIX include routing for upstream and frontend services, masking using proxy rewrite, and the integration of different plugins like Prometheus and Grafana. These plugins are self-integrated, allowing features like JWT authentication, rate limiting, and diverse authentication methods without extra integration. The tool is beneficial for its plugin orchestration which enhances API management with redirection, response rewrite, key authentication, and observability with Grafana and Prometheus.
YM
Developer at a hospitality company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Offers strong integration capabilities and reliable features but needs pricing and scaling improvements
Many things are evolving with the AI buzz in the market. What I would like to see improved or enhanced in webMethods.io in the future is that since webMethods.io is already under IBM, I think IBM will introduce and integrate AI into it. Additionally, regarding what webMethods.io can improve is the license cost. Other cloud players are also providing the same kind of functionality, such as AWS and Azure. webMethods.io is being installed on-premises, but AWS is providing it directly in the cloud. When comparing the license cost and request per minute cost, webMethods.io needs to address that. There are many competitors in the market for this.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable features of Apache APISIX include routing for upstream and frontend services, masking using proxy rewrite, and the integration of different plugins like Prometheus and Grafana."
"I recommend Apache APISIX to others because of its many useful features."
"webMethods Trading Networks is a good solution for interacting with outside of the organization. We can integrate the solutions with multiple outside the organization."
"A product with good API and EDI components."
"When it comes to the user interface, I'm already really used to it. I cannot say anything against it. For me, it's easy to use."
"It's a good tool, and it has a stable messaging broker."
"The product supports various types of digital documents, including XMLs and EDI."
"Clients choose webMethods.io API for its intuitive interface, promoting seamless interaction and quick communication between systems."
"The product is powerful, straightforward, and easy to use."
"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."
 

Cons

"The routing algorithms in Apache APISIX, such as node-based and round-robin, could be improved. Introducing more plugins and supporting AI features can enhance the solution."
"The user interface is limited and does not support all features of Apache APISIX."
"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."
"Prices should be reduced, ideally by up to 30% for long-term customers like us."
"​Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."
"The solution has big instances when deployed under microservices or in a containerized platform. They need to improve that so that it is competitive with other integration solutions, like Redis and Kafka. Deployments under microservices with those solutions are much more lightweight, in the size of the runtime itself, compared with Software AG."
"Some things could be improved, especially how ActiveTransfer handles third-party file transfers. It would be nice to have a native file-watching mechanism for when you're scheduling jobs with a third-party scheduler. Currently, we are using an outside file watcher solution to check the files before the file transfer. It checks the location to see if the file is there. If the file is there, it will prepare it for transfer. If the file isn't available, it will send an email it can create a ticket send it now. We recommended adding this file watcher mechanism."
"It is difficult to maintain."
"Technical support is an area where they can improve."
"The Software AG Designer could be more memory-efficient or CPU-efficient so that we can use it with middle-spec hardware."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Its cost depends on the use cases."
"Some of the licensing is "component-ized," which is confusing to new users/customers."
"It is a cost-effective solution."
"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."
"Pricing is the number-one downfall. It's too expensive. They could make more money by dropping the price in half and getting more customers. It's the best product there is, but it's too expensive."
"Sometimes we don't have a very clear idea what the licensing will entail at first, because it can be very customizable. On one hand, this can be a good thing, because it can be tailored to a specific customer's needs. But on the other hand it can also be an issue when some customer asks, "What's the cost?" and we can't yet give them an accurate answer."
"I signed a three-year deal with them. It is a yearly locked-in price for the next three years."
"webMethods Trading Networks is a bit costly compared to others solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise64
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Apache APISIX?
The routing algorithms in Apache APISIX, such as node-based and round-robin, could be improved. Introducing more plugins and supporting AI features can enhance the solution.
What is your primary use case for Apache APISIX?
The primary use case for Apache APISIX is to mask the API endpoints for my microservices and use self-given APIs in Apache APISIX and mask those with the actual real ones. This helps to prevent use...
What advice do you have for others considering Apache APISIX?
I rate Apache APISIX an eight out of ten overall. For new users, I advise going through the official documentation deeply to implement the solution efficiently.
What do you like most about Built.io Flow?
The tool helps us to streamline data integration. Its BPM is very strong and powerful. The solution helps us manage digital transformation.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Built.io Flow?
webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them.
What needs improvement with Built.io Flow?
webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache APISIX vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.