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."

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

"It's obvious that the heart of the product lies here. It's comprised of all aspects of ESB (Enterprise Gateway, Adapter, TN, Java) and BPM (task, rules engine)."

"It integrates well with various servers."

"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."

"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."

"The connectivity that the tool provides, along with the functionalities needed for our company's business, are some of the beneficial aspects of the product."

"The product is very stable."

"The messaging part 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."

"webMethods Integration Server could improve on the version control. I'm not sure if Web Method has some kind of inbuilt integration with Bitbucket or GitHub or some kind of version control system. However, that's one area where they can improve."

"The patching of infrastructure is not very smooth and improved authentication should be added in the next feature."

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

"The licensing cost is high compared to other options."

"I would like the solution to provide bi-weekly updates."

"The UI for the admin console is very old. It hasn't been updated for years and is pretty much the same one that we started with. This is something that could be refreshed and made more modern."

"wM SAP Adapter User Guide - Example, like Message Broker setup was unclear, leading to issues during Testing and we had refer the internet forums to understand that there is a Message Broker Cleanup utility and that needs to be setup as well."

"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."

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

"The price is a little bit high, especially regarding their support."

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

"Pricing has to be negotiated with the local Software AG representative. SAG can always prepare an appropriate pricing model for every client."

"The pricing is a yearly license."

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

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

"The price is high and I give it a five out of ten."

"Most of my clients would like the price of the solution to be reduced."