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

Red Hat Fuse vs webMethods.io comparison

Red Hat and IBM are both solutions in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category. Red Hat is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.0, while IBM is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.0. Red Hat holds a 7.0% mindshare in E, compared to IBM’s 11.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Red Hat users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of IBM users who would recommend it.
Red Hat Fuse
Read 24 Red Hat Fuse reviews
  • 1,678 Views
  • 1,644 Comparison Views
100% willing to recommend
webMethods.io
Read 93 webMethods.io reviews
  • 9,371 Views
  • 1,687 Comparison Views
94% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 2025

Red Hat Fuse and webMethods.io compete in the enterprise integration space, offering solutions for developers and businesses. Based on the data comparisons, webMethods.io seems to have an edge with its ease of use and comprehensive integration capabilities.

Features: Red Hat Fuse stands out with its integration capabilities offered through Apache Camel, providing a wide array of connectors. It is developer-friendly and flexible, praised for its scalability and reliability in complex integrations. webMethods.io is recognized for its ease of use and offers a robust set of out-of-box features with extensive connectors, providing a unified platform for diverse integration tasks and strong API management features.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Fuse faces challenges with documentation and user community support. The setup and configuration can be complex, and improvements are needed in the user interface and monitoring tools. Pricing is also a concern. webMethods.io is critiqued for its high cost and complexity in pricing models. Users suggest improved integration with legacy systems, enhanced documentation, and better version control.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both Red Hat Fuse and webMethods.io offer hybrid and cloud deployment options. Red Hat Fuse is developer-friendly but could benefit from better support and comprehensive documentation. webMethods.io provides robust customer support with comprehensive service options, although its deployment can be complex and expensive.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Fuse is perceived as more cost-effective, especially for open-source users, but initial costs are high. Users report positive ROI over time. webMethods.io is often expensive, better suited for large-scale enterprises. Despite the high cost, it delivers strong outcomes and stable integrations, offering value against the investment.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Red Hat Fuse vs. webMethods.io Report (Updated: July 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Red Hat Fuse vs. webMethods.io
July 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 866,088 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

Red Hat Fuse
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (9th), API Management (10th), Cloud Data Integration (8th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Red Hat Fuse is 7.0%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 11.1%, up from 9.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
webMethods.io11.1%
Red Hat Fuse7.0%
Other81.9%
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

Kaushal Kedia - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers a single console for all applications and supports Camel routing
Containerization is one key area where the product can improve, but it probably has already improved in JBOS integration. On a few occasions, our company's production team faced an issue with Red Hat Fuse; the screen displayed that the containers had gone down while, in reality, they were running in the background. The user interface and the back-end code were not in sync in the aforementioned situation, which our organization frequently faced while using Red Hat Fuse. But at our company, we were using an older version of Red Hat Fuse in which we faced the issues. From the JBOS end, the product was very frequently changed from Red Hat, and it was difficult for our clients to keep investing money in every upgrade. Six or seven years back, Red Hat Fuse was one of the best solutions.
Read full review
MohanPrasad - PeerSpot reviewer
Smooth integration and enhanced deployment with high licensing cost
webMethods.io was used to integrate APIs through the webMethods.io platform, trigger database events, and connect backend APIs through a Java backend. It was used extensively for integration purposes in my organization Integration became smoother, troubleshooting was easier, and deployment and…
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

"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."
"The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing."
"This solution's adaptability to our use case has helped us integrate our systems seamlessly."
"The most valuable feature is that it's the same as Apache Camel."
"The solution is stable. We have gone for months or years without any issue. There are no memory restarts, so from my point of view, it's very stable."
"One of the features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse is that it has a lot of containers so you won't have to worry about load balancing. In the past, there was a cut-off, but nowadays, Red Hat Fuse is moving off of that, so my team is utilizing it the most for load balancing, particularly running goal applications and three to five containers. There's automatic load balancing so you won't have to worry too much. I also found that component-wise, you don't have to do much coding in Red Hat Fuse because everything is configurable, for example, XML-based coding. Coding isn't that difficult. Performance-wise, I also found the solution to be quite good and its processing is quite fast. My team is processing a huge amount of data with the help of Red Hat Fuse."
"With a premium, one can get support 24 hours."
"The stability has been good."
More Red Hat Fuse pros
"Best feature is Insight for monitoring, and as a debugging tool. It has saved us a lot of time during crisis situations."
"The most valuable feature of the webMethods Integration Server is the built-in monitoring, auditing, RETS, and SOAP services."
"Operationally, I consider the solution to be quite good."
"The solution's ease-of-use is its most valuable feature, in which complex issues may be resolved."
"What I like the most about the solution is that it comes with ready-made tools like handling security tokens and OAuth."
"With webMethods, the creation of servers and the utilization of Trading Networks facilitate B2B integration. It resolves any related issues effectively."
"There were no complexities involved in the setup phase...The product is able to meet my company's API protection needs."
"They are the building blocks of EAI in SAG products, and they offer a very good platform."
More webMethods.io pros
 

Cons

"The web tools need to be updated."
"As its learning curve is quite steep, developer dependency will always be there in the case of a Red Hat Fuse development. This should be improved for developers. There should be some built-in connectors so the grind of the developer can be reduced."
"The solution will be discontinued in 2024."
"The main issue with Red Hat Fuse is the outdated and scattered documentation."
"I would like to see more up-to-date documentation and examples from Red Hat Fuse."
"I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process."
"Red Hat is not easy to learn. You can learn it but you sometimes need external expertise to implement solutions."
"Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible."
More Red Hat Fuse cons
"I would like to have a dashboard where I can see all of the communication between components and the configuration."
"Technical support is an area where they can improve."
"I am not satisfied with the solution because it takes too much effort to migrate and add new information. The migration could be easier."
"Documentation needs tuning. There is a lot of dependency with SoftwareAG. Even with the documentation at hand, you can struggle to implement scenarios without SAG’s help. By contrast, IBM’s documentation is self-explanatory, in my opinion."
"The certifications and learning resources are not exposed openly enough. For instance, they have a trial version which comes with only a few basic features, and I think that community-wise they need to offer more free or open spaces where developers can feel encouraged to experiment."
"The patching of infrastructure is not very smooth and improved authentication should be added in the next feature."
"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."
"This product is for larger companies. Compared to TIBCO I think webMethods is better in terms of ease of use and support."
More webMethods.io cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution doesn't have independent licensing."
"In terms of pricing, Red Hat Fuse is a bit expensive because nowadays, if I'm just comparing it with OpenShift with Kubernetes, so Kubernetes and OpenShift, are similar, and Kubernetes is open source, so Red Hat Fuse is quite expensive in terms of support, but Red Hat Fuse provides value for money because it provides good support. If you want to get something, you need to pay for it."
"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"This is an expensive product. It costs a lot and although it's worth the money, the explanations that we need to give to our top executives are highly complicated."
"Red Hat Fuse is an expensive tool, though I cannot answer how much it costs as that's confidential."
"Pricing has been something that we have been working with Red Hat on, year over year. We have preferred pricing with the university because we are involved in education and research."
"We are paying around $24 million across five years."
"Red Hat Fuse saved us money. It is a lot easier to license for cloud deployments."
More Red Hat Fuse pricing and cost advice
"Sometimes we don't have a very clear idea what the licensing will entail at first, because it can be very customizable. On one hand, this can be a good thing, because it can be tailored to a specific customer's needs. But on the other hand it can also be an issue when some customer asks, "What's the cost?" and we can't yet give them an accurate answer."
"The pricing is a yearly license."
"The vendor is flexible with respect to pricing."
"Pricing is the number-one downfall. It's too expensive. They could make more money by dropping the price in half and getting more customers. It's the best product there is, but it's too expensive."
"It is expensive, but we reached a good agreement with the company. It is still a little bit expensive, but we got a better deal than the previous one."
"webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them."
"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."
"There are no hidden costs in addition to the standard licensing fees for webMethods. For corporate organizations, it's a very cheap or fairly priced product, but for growing or small businesses, it's quite expensive. These businesses would probably need to consider an enterprise services bus at some point. Thus, from a pricing point, it closes out non-cooperate businesses."
More webMethods.io pricing and cost advice
report
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
866,088 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

AS
Jan 26, 2022
Jan 26, 2022
What are pros and cons of Red Hat Fuse vs webMethods Integration Server?
With webMethods Integration Server, you have the power to connect anything faster, thanks to open, standards-based integration. Make custom, packaged and mainframe applications and databases—on-premises and in the cloud—interoperable and assure the fluid flow of data across your automated processes. Mapping and transformation functions are built-in. pro's; Easy scalability, 300+ connectors, ...
See 2 answers
DK
Jul 29, 2021
With webMethods Integration Server, you have the power to connect anything faster, thanks to open, standards-based integration. Make custom, packaged and mainframe applications and databases—on-premises and in the cloud—interoperable and assure the fluid flow of data across your automated processes. Mapping and transformation functions are built-in. pro's; Easy scalability, 300+ connectors, Faster integrations, "Lift & shift" integrations, Mapping and transformation & iPaaS integrations in the cloud Where Red Hat Fuse, pros; Hybrid deployment, Built-in iPaaS with low-code UI/UX, Container-based integration & Integration everywhere supporting 200 included connectors. Red Hat Fuse, based on open source communities like Apache Camel and Apache ActiveMQ, is part of an agile integration solution. Its distributed approach allows teams to deploy integrated services where required. The API-centric, container-based architecture decouples services so they can be created, extended, and deployed independently.
Read full answer
PP
Jan 26, 2022
Hello Andhika Please read Dave's reply first and understand that WebMethods offers many features that you will not find in RedHat Fuse. I would like to add one more architectural point of view. WebMethods provides a nice business process engine that helps you orchestrate your services. Fuse is not able to provide this kind of service.  If your processes are simple and map information, for example, use Fuse.  If your business processes are complex and require balancing, I recommend an integration tool with a business process engine (BPEL or BPMN). WebMethods, Oracle SOA Suite or OpenESB offer these types of tools.  If you plan to design complex processes, you should not hesitate to choose WebMethods.
Read full answer
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise63
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Red Hat Fuse?
The process workflow, where we can orchestrate and design the application by defining different routes, is really useful.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Red Hat Fuse?
Containerization is one key area where the product can improve, but it probably has already improved in JBOS integration. On a few occasions, our company's production team faced an issue with Red H...
See all answers
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Fuse?
Our company used Red Hat Fuse to integrate layers of numerous applications. The solution has also been used in our organization for orchestration purposes of multiple microservices over the years. ...
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 Red Hat Fuse Logo
IBM Integration Bus vs Red Hat Fuse
Compared 29% of the time
JBoss ESB vs Red Hat Fuse Logo
JBoss ESB vs Red Hat Fuse
Compared 19% of the time
Mule ESB vs Red Hat Fuse Logo
Mule ESB vs Red Hat Fuse
Compared 19% of the time
Oracle Service Bus vs Red Hat Fuse Logo
Oracle Service Bus vs Red Hat Fuse
Compared 15% of the time
More Red Hat Fuse Competitors
IBM App Connect vs webMethods.io Logo
IBM App Connect vs webMethods.io
Compared 7% of the time
IBM Integration Bus vs webMethods.io Logo
IBM Integration Bus vs webMethods.io
Compared 7% of the time
Apigee vs webMethods.io Logo
Apigee vs webMethods.io
Compared 6% of the time
IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs webMethods.io Logo
IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs webMethods.io
Compared 6% of the time
Boomi iPaaS vs webMethods.io Logo
Boomi iPaaS vs webMethods.io
Compared 4% of the time
More webMethods.io Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Red Hat Fuse
August 2025
Red Hat Fuse reportDownload Red Hat Fuse product report
Buyer's Guide
webMethods.io
August 2025
webMethods.io reportDownload webMethods.io product report
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

Red Hat JBoss Fuse is a lightweight, flexible integration platform that enables rapid integration across the extended enterprise - on-premise or in the cloud. JBoss Fuse includes modular integration capabilities, an enterprise service bus (ESB), to unlock information.

Red Hat

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

Avianca, American Product Distributors (APD), Kings College Hospital, AMD, CenturyLink, AECOM, E*TRADE
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Buyer's Guide
Red Hat Fuse vs. webMethods.io
July 2025
Free Report: Red Hat Fuse vs. webMethods.io
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat Fuse vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
866,088 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Red Hat Fuse 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.