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

IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs Microsoft Azure API Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

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

IBM Cloud Pak for Integration
Ranking in API Management
27th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (17th)
Microsoft Azure API Management
Ranking in API Management
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
83
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the API Management category, the mindshare of IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is 0.8%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure API Management is 14.7%, down from 19.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Azure API Management14.7%
IBM Cloud Pak for Integration0.8%
Other84.5%
API Management
 

Featured Reviews

Igor Khalitov - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner/Full Stack Software Engineer at Maraphonic, Inc.
Manages APIs and integrates microservices with redirection feature
IBM Cloud Pak for Integration includes monitoring capabilities to track the performance and health of your integrations. You can quickly roll back to a previous version if an issue arises. Additionally, it supports incremental deployments, allowing you to shift traffic to a new version of an API gradually. For example, you can start by directing 10% of traffic to the new version while the rest continue using the legacy version. If everything works as expected, you can gradually increase the traffic to the new version over time. IBM Cloud Pak for Integration has a client base that includes numerous organizations using AI and machine learning technologies. We leverage an open-source machine learning framework and integrate it with Kafka to help create and manage various products and data retrieval processes. For companies with private data, the framework first retrieves relevant data from a GitHub database, which is then combined with the final request before being sent to a language model like GPT. This ensures that the language model uses your specific data to generate responses. Kafka plays a key role by streaming real-time data from file systems and databases like Oracle and Microsoft SQL. This data is published to Kafka topics, then vectorized and used with artificial intelligence to enhance the overall process. It's like an old-fashioned approach. The best way is to redesign it with products such as Kafka. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
RJ
Database Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Facilitating seamless integration and robust security support
The integration process is very easy, which is crucial for our organization. Another valuable aspect is the support from Microsoft. Whenever support is required, it is readily available. Additionally, I appreciate the technical expertise Microsoft brings to the table. The security features are highly satisfactory, with various options providing flexibility to implement security measures based on specific compliance requirements.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cloud Pak for Integration is definitely scalable. That is the most important criteria."
"Redirection is a key feature. It helps in managing multiple microservices by centralizing control and access."
"The most preferable aspect would be the elimination of the command, which was a significant improvement. In the past, it was a challenge, but now we can proceed smoothly with the implementation of our policies and everything is managed through JCP. It's still among the positive aspects, and it's a valuable feature."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable aspect of the Cloud Pak, in general, is the flexibility that you have to use the product."
"We're very satisfied with Azure API Management. We've had no issues with bugs, everything runs smoothly, and the connection between the cloud and the on-premise infrastructure was good."
"The package as a whole is useful for our customers."
"The stability and performance are good. It is easy to install, and it scales well too."
"Everything is already available and ready to operate without a lot of preparation work."
"It's easy to use compared to other products. It's easy to set up."
"The API management is great."
"Microsoft Azure API Management is better because it has a DevOps integration by default."
"Microsoft Azure API Management has many valuable features. One is the developer portal, that's very useful for teams. The tool also provides layers of security. I also found the caching, automatic documentation, and version management functionalities most valuable."
 

Cons

"Enterprise bots are needed to balance products like Kafka and Confluent."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"The pricing can be improved."
"Setting up Cloud Pak for Integration is relatively complex. It's not as easy because it has not yet been fully integrated. You still have some products that are still not containerized, so you still have to run them on a dedicated VM."
"Its queuing and messaging features need improvement."
"Price is the first thing that comes to mind. It's quite expensive, which could be a barrier for some users."
"Technical support could be more flexible and try to meet the client's needs a bit more effectively."
"I could that the UI could be improved."
"The solution’s security and performance could be improved."
"It would be better if it were easier to transition to Azure from JIRA. For example, different nomenclature must be performed when you shift to Azure from JIRA. JIRA's storage, tasks, and ethics are treated differently from Azure. Here they might become functions, which is not an option in JIRA because that nomenclature difference is there. If someone has to get into the nomenclature, then there can be different tasks from clients, and here, they may be treated as functions. JIRA has sub-tasks, but sub-tasks don't exist in Azure. The nomenclature and the linking between ethics and a function and a story are different, and people may have to learn to adapt to the new nomenclature."
"Multi-tenant functionalities is missing from the system, especially when it comes to the developer code of features."
"The API gateway can be very complex."
"The integration with other API gateways is where they might try to improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's pricing model is very flexible."
"It is an expensive solution."
"It's an expensive solution"
"Since this is a cloud-based solution you have to abide by those financial limits, this creates some different challenges compared to other solutions."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten."
"We pay for a yearly license."
"The licensing cost for Microsoft Azure API Management is publicly available and goes from a developer edition that costs $26 to $30 per month. It may have changed, but it's in the neighborhood of $30 per month. I believe there's also the enterprise edition, which is highly capable and costs $2,500 per month."
"The solution is highly expensive. Our customers worry about the costs. The price should be a lot less."
"The developer and standard pricing tiers of Azure API Management are very competitive compared to other products."
"Microsoft is competitively priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Management solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
12%
Insurance Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise53
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Pak for Integration?
Enterprise bots are needed to balance products like Kafka and Confluent.
What is your primary use case for IBM Cloud Pak for Integration?
It manages APIs and integrates microservices at the enterprise level. It offers a range of capabilities for handling APIs, microservices, and various integration needs. The platform supports thousa...
What advice do you have for others considering IBM Cloud Pak for Integration?
IBM Cloud Pak for Integration includes monitoring capabilities to track the performance and health of your integrations. You can quickly roll back to a previous version if an issue arises. Addition...
How does Apigee differ from Azure API Management?
Apigee offers both cloud-based and on-prem options while Microsoft Azure API Management currently only offers a cloud-based solution. Both solutions are easy to use. Apigee allows for the ability...
Which is better - Azure API Management or Amazon API Gateway?
If you use Azure products, API Management is a great solution. It solves many of the problems of externalizing web services. For example, when you need versioning, establish a developer portal and ...
What do you like most about Microsoft Azure API Management?
Microsoft Azure API Management is a good, comprehensive solution for enterprise implementation.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Azure API Management, MS Azure API Management
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CVS Health Corporation
adnymics GmbH, LG CNS, Centrebet, netfabb GmbH, MedPlast, Accelera Solutions, Sochi Organizing Committee, realzeit GmbH, Opensistemas
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Cloud Pak for Integration vs. Microsoft Azure API Management and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.