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

IBM WebSphere Application Server vs Tomcat 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
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (5th)
Tomcat
Ranking in Application Server
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Application Server category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Application Server is 12.8%, up from 11.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tomcat is 19.9%, down from 20.6% 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.
Erick  Karanja - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers high availability, straightforward deployment and easy to use
Tomcat could be a little bit more innovative. Tomcat could come up with a framework that's more lightweight and purely targeted at Java applications. Some other solutions are doing better right now, maybe because they have come up with MicroProfile, which I think is moving forward. It may actually beat Tomcat because of the lightweight nature of the framework, the MicroProfile. They're coming up with new solutions. So, for the future of Tomcat and to maintain the market share they might be looking for, they need to come up with initiatives to ensure that several of us have a lightweight framework to deploy applications on.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition."
"The product offers good performance."
"The scalability of the product is quite good."
"It does integrate well with the Tivoli Federated Identity Management system."
"High availability, alert management, and deployments are the most valuable features for us. We have the ND version so we can do deployments."
"It has good stability of the application server in the long term compared to other solutions."
"IBM WAS is extremely scalable. It is easy to add additional servers and to divide the load over servers in all kinds of ways."
"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."
"We chose to use Tomcat because it's perfect compared to other containers that we have tested."
"The most valuable feature is how simple it is to deploy the solution."
"The solution is readily available and open-source."
"Tomcat is easy to handle, its installation process does not take much time, and its server speed is also very good compared to other servers."
"I like the solution’s ease of use."
"The product is easy to use."
"It is a scalable platform."
"We can use Apache Tomcat for Java server applications."
 

Cons

"WebSphere is very cumbersome and not user-friendly."
"Based on the field and based on the build that was provided, we've noticed a lot of constraints in terms of the performance now."
"The business logic side of it is sort of missing in the sense that if I want to track and measure velocity, it is not really available. You have to buy another application and embark on a separate implementation. Instead of having different licensing, IBM DataPower should be integrated with WebSphere. It will allow us to build the business layer and rules a lot more efficiently, rather than developing rules within the application. It would be good if we can set up the business layer through parametrization rather than development. IBM DataPower has the business rule and the controls, and if it can be integrated, it would be fantastic. It will help the application in working better in terms of security features and business logic. If you're going to use it for open banking, you will be able to monitor velocity on the total pricing."
"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."
"The current trend is to move to Liberty because of the portability of its cloud and its Kubernetes, which containerize the application."
"The main issue we faced was its limited compatibility with non-Java technologies, which can result in difficulty detecting potential bugs and requiring additional integration efforts."
"The solution could improve the integration."
"The footprint could be reduced so that we can use a smaller virtual machine to run the application. We could also use more scripts. I would like this solution to be more script oriented, rather than GUI oriented."
"Resource configuration like JNDI and queue configuration, similar to other servers, should be provided from the admin console for Tomcat."
"The disability and memory management is a problem with the solution and has room for improvement."
"If it could support the driver's VIN, they can run natively without the GBM. Now, we can run what we call the native cloud application that doesn't require GBM. If Tomcat can support that, it's going to improve performance and backup."
"Java functions should be built better into the solution."
"It will be useful if a direct report concerning a particular server configuration or application usage is readily available in the dashboard."
"Tomcat is not user-friendly. I would also like to be able to have multiple applications run at the same time."
"The solution's interface and backup features could be better."
"Our biggest challenge is that the Tomcat servers are not hosted locally."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We pay around $200,000 annually."
"The pricing is a little expensive."
"Room for improvement would only be in the licensing. As with all IBM products the licensing can be complex and expensive. Bargain well and try to get as much discount as possible. Discounts of 85% are possible. Without the discount, I think the product is overrated."
"The licensing cost is 1,000 of euros for a 30-year table."
"It is very expensive."
"The price of IBM WebSphere Application Server could be less expensive and there is an annual license required for this solution."
"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."
"It is an expensive product."
"The price of the solution is good."
"Tomcat's pricing is very cheap."
"We are currently using the open-source version."
"The solution is open source so is free."
"Tomcat is an open source solution."
"There are no additional costs apart from the standard license."
"The solution is free."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Server solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
32%
Computer Software Company
14%
Insurance Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
41%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 do you like most about Tomcat?
Tomcat's ease of use has positively impacted project timelines. Tomcat already has high availability – it doesn't go down so often and doesn't require a lot of maintenance. As long as your applicat...
What needs improvement with Tomcat?
Resource configuration like JNDI and queue configuration, similar to other servers, should be provided from the admin console for Tomcat. Currently, it is done manually. The server config file must...
What is your primary use case for Tomcat?
I am using the solution at running level three. It is for running web applications.
 

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
1. Adobe Systems 2. Amazon 3. Apple 4. AT&T 5. Bank of America 6. Boeing 7. Cisco Systems 8. Citigroup 9. Dell 10. eBay 11. Facebook 12. General Electric 13. Google 14. Hewlett-Packard 15. IBM 16. Intel 17. JPMorgan Chase 18. Microsoft 19. Netflix 20. Oracle 21. PayPal 22. Salesforce 23. Samsung 24. Sony 25. Target 26. Twitter 27. Uber 28. Verizon 29. Visa 30. Volkswagen 31. Walmart 32. Yahoo
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Tomcat and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.