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

IBM WebSphere Application Server vs Oracle Application Server comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 2, 2025

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 WebSphere Application S...
Ranking in Application Server
4th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (3rd)
Oracle Application Server
Ranking in Application Server
7th
Average Rating
6.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.3
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Application Server category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Application Server is 13.0%, up from 11.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Application Server is 4.0%, down from 5.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Server
 

Featured Reviews

BharathirajaSukumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient load balancing and the clustering, achieved by using the deployment manager, is valuable
I believe that the system is already good. However, for improvement or enhancement, it is user-friendly, but it could offer better choices on the front end for different aspects or options. Sometimes, I have to search extensively for features, as there are no upfront tabs. There is a lack of visible, easy, user-friendly, and straightforward options for the number of features.
SK
Quick deployment and easy implementation with complex logic challenges
We use Oracle Application Server for a loan management system. We created it for a client; it is a low-code platform. Everything is purchased in Oracle Cloud, and we use it to develop and deploy applications The product offers easy implementation, which is a benefit. It saves development time…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Ease of administration: It has an Integrated Solutions Console, what we call the administrative console, with very detailed configurations and Help pages for each configurable item."
"What's most valuable in IBM WebSphere Application Server is its resilience. When you use the solution, you know that after the communication has been done, there will be no doubt that the data has reached its destination."
"Starting with version 8, WAS provides a special folder called monitor deployment. Once you put the .war or .ear file in there, it is deployed automatically without human intervention. This greatly helps us in our continuous integration server. Once the deployment binary is ready, we write a script to copy it to that folder and then, voila! The application is up and running and accessible from its context root."
"This solution is easy to use with a GUI that is intuitive and very helpful."
"I find IBM support to be very nice."
"Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition."
"IBM WAS is extremely scalable. It is easy to add additional servers and to divide the load over servers in all kinds of ways."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is one of the best servers due to its stability and paid license."
"The product offers easy implementation, which is a benefit. It saves development time compared to normal development processes."
 

Cons

"WebSphere is very cumbersome and not user-friendly. It used to have its own JVM, which presented challenges such as different architecture and memory leaks."
"WebSphere Application Server doesn't have an automated deployment option, forcing us to use third-party tools like Jenkins UCD and Palo Automated Deployment."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server hasn't changed much. It's still a heavyweight for any company compared to what you get. Unless your code base is deeply linked with it, I don't think it's a great idea to go with this solution. The current trend is toward modularity and containerization, and given the product's requirements, containerization will be difficult. There is a memory requirement as well."
"They should make the solution more lightweight and not bundle everything into a single product."
"In spite of the solution's robustness, it is expensive and a bit difficult to support."
"Initial setup is very simple. Just use the IBM Installation Manager and add the packages. The install wizard takes care of the rest. The only thing that can be difficult is to find the right packages on the IBM website, because of all the changes that IBM does on its website(s)."
"The availability of the solution needs improvement."
"I find the server okay, however, using the Maker instance, the Moving instance, and the Change instance is a little bit complicated without WebSphere knowledge."
"If you have complex business logic, there is no option to build that complex logic inside the platform."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It costs more than some of the others, but, you get what you pay for."
"We used to pay about $100,000-$120,000 US or somewhere around there. That was a bit cost-prohibitive for us to continue."
"We pay around $200,000 annually."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The pricing is a little expensive."
"The licensing policy is based on the PVU base."
"It is very expensive."
"When you purchase Maximo, you get WebSphere for free."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Server solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
7%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Government
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM WebSphere Application Server?
Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Application Server?
In Korea, when you buy IBM iOS, the WebSphere base version is included with iOS. That means no additional cost.
What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Application Server?
I find the server okay, however, using the Maker instance, the Moving instance, and the Change instance is a little bit complicated without WebSphere knowledge.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Oracle Application Server?
The pricing model is costly. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it around four to five. Compared to other solutions like Mendix, Oracle Application Server is more expensive.
What needs improvement with Oracle Application Server?
If you have complex business logic, there is no option to build that complex logic inside the platform. You have to use third-party tools. If Oracle could provide an inbuilt feature for complex log...
What is your primary use case for Oracle Application Server?
We use Oracle Application Server for a loan management system. We created it for a client; it is a low-code platform. Everything is purchased in Oracle Cloud, and we use it to develop and deploy ap...
 

Also Known As

WebSphere Application Server
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TalkTalk, Property management group, E.SUN Bank, Ohio National Financial Services, Aviarc, Cincom Systems, FJA-US, D+H, Staples, Michigan Municipal League
Abu Dhabi National Oil Company Distribution
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Oracle Application Server and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.