IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs webMethods.io comparison

IBM WebSphere Message Broker and webMethods.io are both solutions in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.0, while webMethods.io is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.2. IBM WebSphere Message Broker holds a 3.9% mindshare in E, compared to webMethods.io’s 10.9% mindshare. Additionally, 84% of IBM WebSphere Message Broker users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of webMethods.io users who would recommend it.

IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Read 13 IBM WebSphere Message Broker reviews

889 Views
728 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

webMethods.io

Read 92 webMethods.io reviews

2,048 Views
1,443 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

IBM WebSphere Message Broker

webMethods.io

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 2025

IBM WebSphere Message Broker and webMethods.io compete in the integration space. webMethods.io seems to have the upper hand due to its modern features and flexibility, particularly in cloud environments.

Features: IBM WebSphere Message Broker is recognized for its secure communication protocols, scalability, and robust message processing capabilities. webMethods.io offers dynamic integration capabilities, easy-to-use APIs, and extensive cloud support, making it ideal for businesses integrating cloud applications.

Room for Improvement: IBM WebSphere Message Broker could benefit from a more streamlined deployment process and reduced complexity in setup. Enhancing cloud compatibility may also be advantageous. webMethods.io could improve by expanding support for legacy systems and offering more robust documentation. Integration with non-standard protocols could also be enhanced.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM WebSphere Message Broker requires more traditional deployment methods, which can be complex and time-consuming but offers deep and prompt customer support. webMethods.io, being cloud-native, allows a streamlined and efficient deployment process with customer service known for swift issue resolution.

Pricing and ROI: IBM WebSphere Message Broker has a high initial cost but is designed for long-term value in large-scale implementations. webMethods.io offers a flexible pricing model with lower initial costs, attractive to small and medium businesses, and provides quick ROI through its agile deployment model.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. webMethods.io Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. webMethods.io

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 851,604 peers since 2012

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 Message Broker

Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

8th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Infrastructure (16th)

webMethods.io

Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (9th), API Management (9th), Cloud Data Integration (7th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is 3.9%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 10.9%, up from 9.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

Featured Reviews

BrajendraKumar

Technical Architect at HCL Technologies

Offers large-sized business information processing with a time-saving setup and impressive stability

I primarily use two previews of the product for Dev and two for QA as part of the production process. Whatever tools our company is using, the cost of a license in IBM WebSphere Message Broker is about 80% of all these software or tools. The message routing capabilities satisfy workflow efficiency. The product supports message formats of XML, JSON, and SSID, which are around 24 KB to 50 KB in size. The solution supports communication protocols like STTP and TCP. Features like DataGraph need to be introduced in IBM WebSphere Message Broker. Some of the clients of our organization are using an outdated version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker for which the vendor doesn't provide direct support anymore. For the aforementioned version, our company professionals can solve the queries on their own without seeking support from IBM. During the installation of a prior version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker, sometimes I have to configure the failovers through the cluster, where issues arise, and I often seek help from the support team. The solution is being used by some medicine companies in our organization that receive sales orders from the EDR or JDE. I would not recommend the product to others as its becoming obsolete and they can rather choose a middleware solution from Amazon or Azure. But I would overall rate the product a nine out of ten.

Read full review

Michele Illiano

Head of Division at Innovery

Can function as an ESB along with the core product, with decent integration of message protocols

I have noticed that webMethods ActiveTransfer has had problems when handling large files. For example, when we receive (and perform operations on) files that are larger than about 16 MB, the software starts losing performance. This is why, for most customers who have to deal with big files, I suggest that they use a product other than ActiveTransfer. I would like to note that this problem mainly concerns large files that undergo extra operations, such assigning, unassigning, or file translation. When these operations take place on large files, ActiveTransfer will use up a lot of resources. Within the product itself, I also believe that there is room for improvement in terms of optimization when it comes to general performance. I suspect that the issues underlying poor optimization are because it is all developed in Java. That is, all the objects and functions that are used need to be better organized, especially when it comes to big files but also overall. webMethods ActiveTransfer was born as an ESB to handle messages, and these messages were typically very short, i.e. small in size. A message is data that you have to send to an application, where it must be received in real-time and possibly processed or acknowledged elsewhere in the system as well. So, because it was initially designed for small messages, it struggles with performance when presented with very large files. All this to say, I suggest that they have an engineer reevaluate the architecture of the product in order to consider cases where large files are sent, and not only small ones. As for new features, compared to other products in the market, I think Software AG should be more up to date when it comes to extra protocol support, especially those protocols that other solutions have included in their products by default. Whenever we need to add an unsupported protocol, we have to go through the effort of custom development in order to work with it. Also, all the banks are obligated to migrate to the new standards, and big companies are all handling translations and operating their libraries with the new protocol formats. But webMethods ActiveTransfer doesn't seem to be keeping up with this evolution. Thus, they should aim to be more compliant in future, along the lines of their competitors such as IBM and Primeur.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."

"The solution has good integration."

"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."

"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."

"It's reliable for our day-to-day operations, ensuring fast and secure data integration across different systems."

"Straightforward development and deployment."

"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."

"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker pros

"Segregation of deployment for the environments is the most valuable feature of the solution."

"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is its reliability. It has a lot of great documentation from the service providers. Additionally, it is easy to use."

"Best feature is Insight for monitoring, and as a debugging tool. It has saved us a lot of time during crisis situations."

"High throughput and excellent scalability."

"The MFT component of webMethods, for example, is easy to set up and convenient to use. It handles files very efficiently and it is easy to automate tasks with complex schedules. Monitoring is centralized to MWS which can be used to monitor other products as well (Trading Networks, BPM, MFT, etc.)"

"Given that you have one integration API in place, it takes very minimal effort to scale it to any other application that might want to use the same. Its flow-based development environment is a breeze and makes it really easy to re-use most of the existing components and build up a new API."

"We can arrange data caching and look at the solid state. Also, the API gateway is a very good component that can handle relevant cachings and integrations, as well as and also load permitting."

"The ease of mapping... is the single largest feature. It gives us the ability to craft anything. A lot of single-purpose technologies, like Mirth, are good for healthcare messages, but we use webMethods not only for healthcare messages but for other business-related purposes, like integrations to Salesforce or integrations to Office 365. It's multi-purpose nature is very strong."

More webMethods.io pros

Cons

"The product's features are not being upgraded or enhanced by the vendor"

"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."

"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."

"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."

"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."

"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."

"The installation configuration is quite difficult."

"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker cons

"The product must add more compatible connectors."

"The interface needs some work. It is not very user-friendly."

"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."

"Large file handling is pretty hard comparatively to other middleware tools."

"The stability of the various modules of the product suite have been a bit of a concern lately. Though their support team is always easy to reach out to, I would prefer it not come to that."

"This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support."

"Upgrades are complex. They typically take about five months from start to finish. There are many packages that plug into webMethods Integration Server, which is the central point for a vast majority of the transactions at my organization. Anytime we are upgrading that, there are complexities within each component that we must understand. That makes any upgrade very cumbersome and complicated. That has been my experience at this company. Because there are many different business units that we are touching, there are so many different components that we are touching. The amount of READMEs that you have to go through takes some time."

"The installation process should be simplified for first time users and be made more user-friendly."

More webMethods.io cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."

"The solution is expensive."

"The licensing cost of IBM WebSphere Message Broker needs to be reduced"

"The solution is expensive."

"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."

"I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."

"This product is more expensive than competing products."

"IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time."

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

"webMethods.io Integration's pricing is high and has yearly subscription costs."

"The price of webMethods Integration Server isn't that high from an enterprise context, but open-source ESB solutions will always be the cheapest."

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

"webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them."

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

"I am not involved in the licensing side of things."

"The product is expensive."

More webMethods.io pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

31%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM WebSphere Message Broker?

It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?

IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Message Broker?

There could be greater flexibility and agility in service creation for the product. As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordi...

See all answers

What do you like most about Built.io Flow?

The tool helps us to streamline data integration. Its BPM is very strong and powerful. The solution helps us manage digital transformation.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Built.io Flow?

webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Built.io Flow?

webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience.

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM Integration Bus vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 48% of the time

IBM DataPower Gateway vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 12% of the time

Mule ESB vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 11% of the time

IBM BPM vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 9% of the time

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker Competitors

IBM App Connect vs webMethods.io

Compared 8% of the time

IBM Integration Bus vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

Apigee vs webMethods.io

Compared 7% of the time

IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

Boomi iPaaS vs webMethods.io

Compared 4% of the time

More webMethods.io Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere Message Broker

May 2025

Download IBM WebSphere Message Broker product report

Buyer's Guide

webMethods.io

April 2025

Download webMethods.io product report

Also Known As

WebSphere Message Broker

Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API

Overview

WebSphere Message Broker is an enterprise service bus (ESB) providing connectivity and universal data transformation for service-oriented architecture (SOA) and non-SOA environments. It allows businesses of any size to eliminate point-to-point connections and batch processing regardless of platform, protocol or data format.

IBM

webMethods.io Integration is a powerful integration platform as a service (iPaaS) that provides a combination of capabilities offered by ESBs, data integration systems, API management tools, and B2B gateways.

IBM

Sample Customers

WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire

Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. webMethods.io

April 2025

Free Report: IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. webMethods.io

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. webMethods.io report.

See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors and best Cloud Data Integration vendors.

We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.