SAP Process Orchestration vs webMethods.io comparison

SAP and IBM are both solutions in the Business-to-Business Middleware category. SAP is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.0, while IBM is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.2. SAP holds a 8.0% mindshare in BBM, compared to IBM’s 10.0% mindshare. Additionally, 91% of SAP users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of IBM users who would recommend it.

SAP Process Orchestration

Read 33 SAP Process Orchestration reviews

2,005 Views
872 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

webMethods.io

Read 92 webMethods.io reviews

970 Views
727 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

SAP Process Orchestration

webMethods.io

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

SAP Process Orchestration and webMethods.io offer integration solutions, competing in the integration software market. SAP Process Orchestration appeals to SAP-centric enterprises, while webMethods.io leads with cloud connectivity.

Features: SAP Process Orchestration supports BPMN, seamless ERP integration, and comprehensive security, ensuring stable and effective business process management. WebMethods.io offers rapid cloud integration, intuitive user design, and real-time analytics, prioritizing cloud-first strategies.

Room for Improvement: SAP Process Orchestration could focus on simplifying deployment complexity, advancing cloud-native features, and enhancing user experience. WebMethods.io might improve SAP integration depth, expand its toolkit, and optimize for high-volume data handling.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: WebMethods.io, being cloud-native, facilitates quick deployment with reliable support. SAP Process Orchestration involves more complex on-premises setup but provides robust support for SAP users.

Pricing and ROI: WebMethods.io offers flexible Pay-as-You-Go pricing, often leading to quicker ROI for cloud-focused businesses. SAP Process Orchestration requires a higher initial investment, justified in complex SAP environments with gradual ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io Report (Updated: May 2025).

Buyer's Guide

SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io

May 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

SAP Process Orchestration

Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware

2nd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

webMethods.io

Ranking in Business-to-Business Middleware

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (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 Business-to-Business Middleware category, the mindshare of SAP Process Orchestration is 8.0%, down from 12.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 10.0%, up from 8.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Business-to-Business Middleware

Featured Reviews

Laxman Molugu

Chief Executive Officer at Saanvi systems inc

Enhances operational efficiency with valuable prepackaged content and cost-effective pricing

For organizations that operate within an SAP ecosystem, SAP Process Orchestration is recommended due to its cost-effectiveness and the availability of valuable prepackaged content. It is important to consider the needs of your industry, as SAP Process Orchestration may not meet all requirements in consumer-oriented sectors. I'd rate the solution eight 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

"t is a pretty stable solution. I have not seen any outages in the solution."

"The standard adapter with EBA abilities is the most valuable feature. It has good process integration."

"The solution provides very good and central logging systems. It offers high flexibility with vertical and horizontal extend capacity."

"The most valuable features of SAP Process Orchestration are its system monitoring and alerts."

"It provides essential features such as continuous monitoring of all interfaces are crucial for our needs."

"I think it is a very stable tool. My company did not have any problem with the tool."

"The most valuable features of SAP Process Orchestration are the standard APIs that we can use."

"In my opinion, SAP PO is the most mature suite of tools to integrate processes across SAP environments at this moment. It's really unbeatable because it allows you to integrate whatever scenarios you can imagine."

More SAP Process Orchestration pros

"webMethods Trading Networks is a stable solution."

"I would say the core Web-based integrations work the best. They are the most efficient and robust implementations one can do with webMethods."

"A product with good API and EDI components."

"It's a good tool, and it has a stable messaging broker."

"We needed a tool that was able to orchestrate and help us configure our APIs so that we could maintain and see the heartbeat, traffic, trends, etc."

"The most valuable aspect of this solution for me has been the configuration-based UI. Once you get the hang of it, it enables you to easily develop an API. In addition, it has many in-built policies that are quite handy."

"Most of the work in our organization can be more easily done using the tool."

"The stability is good."

More webMethods.io pros

Cons

"The solution could improve by making it more user-friendly by limiting the code required. We have to add some code in some cases where we need complex logic or some other functions. If this was able to be done in a more simplified manner then it would save a lot of effort and time."

"The solution could be more scalable."

"I think the big improvement required in the tool stems from the fact that the whole issue around it is that we have some downtime failures during upgrades and patching."

"Process Orchestration doesn't provide authentication for data sent to us, meaning we have to rely on client certificate-based or basic authentication."

"The user interface of SAP Process Orchestration should be more modern to enhance its appeal. It can seem complicated and outdated to new users."

"Its administration management feature needs to be simpler to use."

"The usability is an area where it can be improved upon."

"This is an on-premise platform and one area they can improve on is having the ability to work with SaaS solutions."

More SAP Process Orchestration cons

"We'd like for them to open up to a more cloud-based solution that could offer more flexibility and maybe a better rules engine or more integration with rules engines."

"Other products have been using AI and cloud enhancements, but webMethods Integration Server is still lagging in that key area."

"They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding."

"With performance, there is room for improvement in regards to if we would like to put another extra layer of security on it, such as SSL. This is affecting their performance quite significantly. They need to improve the process of managing the SSL and other things inside their solutions, so there will not be quite such a significant impact to the performance."

"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."

"There should be better logging, or a better dashboard, to allow you to see see the logs of the services."

"wM SAP Adapter User Guide - Example, like Message Broker setup was unclear, leading to issues during Testing and we had refer the internet forums to understand that there is a Message Broker Cleanup utility and that needs to be setup as well."

"The initial setup of the webMethods Integration Server is not easy but it gets easier once you know it. It is tiresome but not difficult."

More webMethods.io cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Normally, you will have to choose CPU-based licensing...I rate the tool price a five out of ten."

"The product is not a low-priced solution, but I can say that it is competitively priced in the market."

"The solution is highly-priced."

"We subscribe to annual licenses, and the competitive license cost is reasonable."

"The price of SAP Process Orchestration was reasonable."

"The fee for maintenance is costly."

"Looking at market conditions, vendors nowadays are giving products at very low price levels. However, SAP Process Orchestration have not yet reduced their prices. The prices could be reduced a lot to stay competitive."

"It's not an expensive solution."

More SAP Process Orchestration pricing and cost advice

"It is an expensive tool. I rate the product price a nine out of ten, where ten means it is very expensive."

"webMethods Trading Networks is a bit costly compared to others solutions."

"It is worth the cost."

"The product is very expensive."

"Some of the licensing is "component-ized," which is confusing to new users/customers."

"I would like to see better pricing for the license."

"The pricing and licensing costs for webMethods are very high, which is the only reason that we might switch to another product."

"I don’t have much idea about prices, but webMethods API Portal is not something cheaper."

More webMethods.io pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business-to-Business Middleware solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

16%

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Energy/Utilities Company

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 SAP Process Orchestration?

It provides essential features such as continuous monitoring of all interfaces are crucial for our needs.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SAP Process Orchestration?

SAP solutions are generally expensive. SAP Process Orchestration was integrated with SAP ECC in a package, but my customers have consistently described it as an expensive product.

See all answers

What needs improvement with SAP Process Orchestration?

The user interface of SAP Process Orchestration should be more modern to enhance its appeal. It can seem complicated and outdated to new users. Additionally, the tool relies on Java, which feels le...

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

SAP Data Services vs SAP Process Orchestration

Compared 13% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs SAP Process Orchestration

Compared 13% of the time

IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs SAP Process Orchestration

Compared 13% of the time

Workato vs SAP Process Orchestration

Compared 7% of the time

Axway AMPLIFY Application Integration vs SAP Process Orchestration

Compared 5% of the time

More SAP Process Orchestration 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

Kong Gateway Enterprise vs webMethods.io

Compared 2% of the time

More webMethods.io Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

SAP Process Orchestration

April 2025

Download SAP Process Orchestration product report

Buyer's Guide

webMethods.io

April 2025

Download webMethods.io product report

Also Known As

SAP NetWeaver Process Integration, NetWeaver Process Integration

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

Overview

SAP NetWeaver Process Integration facilitates the integration of business processes that span different departments, organizations, or companies. SAP PI is based on general standards so as to enable 3rd-party systems to be integrated. At the center of SAP PI is an XML-based communication that uses HTTP (Hyper Text Transfer Protocol). Irrespective of the scenario used, the application-specific contents are transferred in messages in user-defined XML eXtensible Markup Language) from the sender to the receiver either via the Integration Server, or directly between the systems involved. SAP PI can be installed in different ways: Dual usage type installation: Based on both AS ABAP and AS Java. and Advanced Adapter Engine Extended (AEX): Based on AS Java only.

SAP

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

Lenovo, Dansk Supermarked A/S, Ego Pharmaceuticals Pty. Ltd, Kaeser Kompressoren

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

Buyer's Guide

SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io

May 2025

Free Report: SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io

Find out what your peers are saying about SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our SAP Process Orchestration vs. webMethods.io report.

See our list of best Business-to-Business Middleware vendors and best Cloud Data Integration vendors.

We monitor all Business-to-Business Middleware 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.