Aurea CX Messenger vs webMethods.io comparison

Aurea and IBM are both solutions in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category. Aurea is ranked #14, while IBM is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.1. Aurea holds a 0.7% mindshare in E, compared to IBM’s 10.9% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Aurea users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of IBM users who would recommend it.

Aurea CX Messenger

Read 7 Aurea CX Messenger reviews

192 Views
41 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

webMethods.io

Read 93 webMethods.io reviews

1,781 Views
1,055 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Aurea CX Messenger

webMethods.io

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 2025

Aurea CX Messenger and webMethods.io are prominent competitors in the integration platform field. While Aurea CX Messenger excels in pricing and support services, webMethods.io is seen as superior due to its robust features, making it a preferred choice despite higher costs.

Features: Aurea CX Messenger is recognized for its reliable message queuing, robust security, and scalability. It uses well-known technologies like XSLT and JavaScript to simplify development. webMethods.io offers broad integration options, agility in hybrid and cloud environments, and comprehensive connectors, making it versatile and powerful for various integration needs.

Room for Improvement: Aurea CX Messenger could enhance its versatility to match webMethods.io's broad integration capabilities and update its cloud-native deployment flexibility. Further developing its hybrid environment agility might help it compete better. On the other hand, webMethods.io could benefit from improvements in pricing structure to offer more cost-effective solutions for users and enhancing some specialized modules to match their core integration reliability.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Aurea CX Messenger provides straightforward on-premise deployment with strong support services, ensuring quick issue resolution. webMethods.io emphasizes a smooth and flexible cloud-native deployment with support for multiple environments, offering comprehensive onboarding for enhanced ease and adaptability.

Pricing and ROI: Aurea CX Messenger is appreciated for its cost-efficiency, promising a high ROI through affordability and lower ongoing costs. webMethods.io, though more expensive upfront, offers significant ROI by enhancing business integrations over time. Its long-term value and transformative capabilities often justify the initial investment.

To learn more, read our detailed Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,592 peers since 2012

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

Aurea CX Messenger

Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

14th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business Activity Monitoring (6th), Message Queue (MQ) Software (12th), SOA Governance (4th), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (9th)

webMethods.io

Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (9th), API Management (9th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 0.7%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 10.9%, up from 9.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

Featured Reviews

Radhey Rajput

Sr. IT Analyst at NCR Corporation

Lightweight and efficient solution

It's very good and lightweight. But, it does not provide web service communication. But it is excellent for internal connections One valuable feature is the messaging broker. If there is a disruption, it restores the messages. And when the application is running, it delivers all the messages. The…

Read full review

MohanPrasad

Senior Consultant at Brillio

Smooth integration and enhanced deployment with high licensing cost

webMethods.io was used to integrate APIs through the webMethods.io platform, trigger database events, and connect backend APIs through a Java backend. It was used extensively for integration purposes in my organization Integration became smoother, troubleshooting was easier, and deployment and…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."

"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."

"The solution offers excellent stability."

"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."

"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."

"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."

"Broker and UM are the best features."

"The development is very fast. If you know what you're doing, you can develop something very easily and very fast."

"Our use case is for integration factory for SAP. It is mostly for SAP integration."

"We can arrange data caching and look at the solid state. Also, the API gateway is a very good component that can handle relevant cachings and integrations, as well as and also load permitting."

"webMethods platform is used to build an EAI platform, enabling communication between many internal systems and third-party operators."

"Some of the key features are the integration platform, query mechanism, message handling within the bus, and the rules engine. We've had a really good experience with webMethods Integration Server."

"We have a reusable code that we can replicate for any new interfaces."

"The cloud version of the solution is very easy to set up."

More webMethods.io pros

Cons

"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."

"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."

"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."

"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."

"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."

"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"

"Rapid application development has to be considered, especially for UI, where user interference is crucial."

"As webMethods Integration Server is expensive, that's its area for improvement."

"Prices should be reduced, ideally by up to 30% for long-term customers like us."

"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."

"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."

"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."

"When migration happens from the one release to an upgraded release from Software AG, many of the existing services are deprecated and developers have to put in effort testing and redeveloping some of the services. It would be better that upgrade releases took care to support the lower-level versions of webMethods."

"Upgrades are complex. They typically take about five months from start to finish. There are many packages that plug into webMethods Integration Server, which is the central point for a vast majority of the transactions at my organization. Anytime we are upgrading that, there are complexities within each component that we must understand. That makes any upgrade very cumbersome and complicated. That has been my experience at this company. Because there are many different business units that we are touching, there are so many different components that we are touching. The amount of READMEs that you have to go through takes some time."

More webMethods.io cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscription"

"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."

"The pricing is not so high."

"The solution's development license is free for three to six months. We have to pay for other things."

"webMethods.io Integration's pricing is high and has yearly subscription costs."

"It is worth the cost."

"I do see a lack of capabilities inside of the monetization area for them. They have a cloud infrastructure that is pay per use type of a thing. If you already use 1,000 transactions per se, then you can be charged and billed. I see room for improvement there for their side on that particular capability of the monetization."

"Some who consider this solution often avoid it due to its high price."

"I don’t have much idea about prices, but webMethods API Portal is not something cheaper."

"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."

"I do think webMethods is coming under increasing pressure when it comes to their price-to-feature value proposition. It's probably the single biggest strategic risk they have. They're very expensive in their industry. They've been raising the price recently, especially when compared with their competitors."

More webMethods.io pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

15%

Insurance Company

Media Company

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Built.io Flow?

webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience.

See all answers

Comparisons

TIBCO eFTL vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 36% of the time

IBM MQ vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 32% of the time

ActiveMQ vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 32% of the time

More Aurea CX Messenger Competitors

IBM App Connect vs webMethods.io

Compared 8% of the time

Apigee vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

IBM Integration Bus vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

Boomi iPaaS vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

More webMethods.io Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Business Activity Monitoring

May 2025

Download Aurea CX Messenger product report

Buyer's Guide

webMethods.io

June 2025

Download webMethods.io product report

Also Known As

CX Messenger Enterprise, Aurea Sonic ESB, Aurea Sonic, Aurea Sonic MQ

Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API

Overview

CX Messenger lets your technology keep pace with your business. Aurea’s industry leading Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) lets you adapt and change your infrastructure with plug-and-play speed and ease.

Aurea

webMethods.io Integration is a powerful integration platform as a service (iPaaS) that provides a combination of capabilities offered by ESBs, data integration systems, API management tools, and B2B gateways.

IBM

Sample Customers

Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom Mortgage

Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings

Buyer's Guide

Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io

June 2025

Free Report: Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io

Find out what your peers are saying about Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Aurea CX Messenger vs. webMethods.io report.

See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors and best Cloud Data Integration 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.