Cleo Integration Cloud Platform vs webMethods.io comparison

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the ease of use it provides. Cleo Integration Cloud Platform is a straightforward and simple product."

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

"It's a visual tool, so our transformations can be quickly implemented without a lot of fuss. The fact that we have an easy way to expose REST services is also very interesting. It offers the possibility to connect over GMS to synchronize message brokers."

"It integrates well with various servers."

"​Broker and UM are the best features."

"It has a good integration server, designer, and a very good API portal."

"One of the most important features is that it gives you the possibility to do low-level integration. It provides a lot of features out of the box, and over the years, it has matured so much that any problem that is there in the market can be solved with this product. We can meet any requirements through customizations, transformations, or the logic that needs to be put in. Some of the other products struggle in this aspect. They cannot do things in a certain way, or they have a product limitation, whereas, with webMethods, I have never faced this kind of problem."

"I like the stability of the webMethods Integration Server."

"Oracle's self-service capabilities, of which we make extensive use, is the most valuable feature."

"Currently, the solution fails to provide users with additional protocol assistance and API integrations, so the aforementioned areas need to be considered for improvement."

"Need to see more API portal features like monetizing APIs and private cloud readiness."

"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"I would like to see the price improve."

"Rules engine processes and BPM processes should be improved."

"The improvement needed is related to the model's position. As of now, it seems to be more of a conceptual idea rather than a widely implemented solution. For how long"

"The on-premises setup can be difficult."

"Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion."

"The configuring of the JWT token would be improved as it is a confusing process. We require more information on this part of the solution."

"I learned that the product's price is reasonable based on the interactions I had with my company's purchase team."

"Its cost depends on the use cases."

"There are no hidden costs in addition to the standard licensing fees for webMethods. For corporate organizations, it's a very cheap or fairly priced product, but for growing or small businesses, it's quite expensive. These businesses would probably need to consider an enterprise services bus at some point. Thus, from a pricing point, it closes out non-cooperate businesses."

"This is not a cheap solution but, compared to other products such as those offered by IBM, the pricing is similar."

"Initialy good pricing and good, if it comes to Enterprise license agreements."

"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."

"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."

"The pricing is a yearly license."

"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."