Make vs. webMethods.io Integration

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Make
Score 9.3 out of 10
N/A
Make (formerly Integromat) automates integration between applications. It features data transformation capabilities within a no-code graphic interface. The former Integromat was acquired by Celonis in 2020, and the current product Make is a Celonis brand.
$9
per month
webMethods.io Integration
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
webMethods.io Integration (formerly webMethods Integration Cloud) from Software AG is designed to make it easy to connect SaaS apps and make business processes more efficient. It enables enterprise subject matter experts and eliminates integration silos, allowing users to integrate applications hosted in public or private clouds, as well as applications hosted on premises.N/A
Pricing
MakewebMethods.io Integration
Editions & Modules
Free
$0
per month
Core
$9
per month
Pro
$16
per month
Teams
$29
per month
Enterprise
Contact
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
MakewebMethods.io Integration
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
MakewebMethods.io Integration
Top Pros
Top Cons
Features
MakewebMethods.io Integration
Cloud Data Integration
Comparison of Cloud Data Integration features of Product A and Product B
Make
8.7
3 Ratings
7% above category average
webMethods.io Integration
7.7
1 Ratings
5% below category average
Pre-built connectors9.03 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Connector modification8.03 Ratings9.01 Ratings
Support for real-time and batch integration8.12 Ratings8.01 Ratings
Data quality services7.03 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Data security features9.92 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Monitoring console10.03 Ratings7.01 Ratings
Best Alternatives
MakewebMethods.io Integration
Small Businesses
Zapier
Zapier
Score 8.9 out of 10
Make
Make
Score 9.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Azure Logic Apps
Azure Logic Apps
Score 8.9 out of 10
Azure Logic Apps
Azure Logic Apps
Score 8.9 out of 10
Enterprises
Azure Logic Apps
Azure Logic Apps
Score 8.9 out of 10
Azure Logic Apps
Azure Logic Apps
Score 8.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
MakewebMethods.io Integration
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(3 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.3
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
MakewebMethods.io Integration
Likelihood to Recommend
Celonis
Integromat is the best tool for business automation in my opinion because unlike Zapier it allows us to integrate with any API even if the app is not available which allows us to create automation even with the less known apps that we use or the ones that we built internally for our own company.
Read full review
Software AG
We don't use webMethods.io Integration for scenarios where we need to integrate to on-premises legacy applications that have limited support for modern security controls such as OAuth 2.0 and transport encryption. Likewise, we don't use it for solutions that involve any of our systems that are controlled by safe-working processes. For those scenarios, of which we have many, we maintain on-premises webMethods Integration Server and Trading Networks instances to build and execute and support and monitor those solutions. This then requires us to hook our on-premises integration platform up to the webMethods.io Integration cloud, to ship messages between the two integration platforms. This all begs the question if a cloud solution cannot be used for all use cases or scenarios that the business has, then why add the complexity of using the cloud at all if you still need to maintain an on-premises solution to support the non-cloud appropriate scenarios.
Read full review
Pros
Celonis
  • Integrations to a multitude of platforms that many other tools don't offer
  • Reliability of scenarios running as planned without consistent errors or failures
  • Scheduling capabilities to prevent exceeding API limits
  • Customization opportunities to align fields and data exactly how they're needed for use case
Read full review
Software AG
  • Easy to use
  • Priced competitively
  • Supports robust and resilient integration solutions
Read full review
Cons
Celonis
  • Adding more services that can be operated
  • Adding support for sending messages to WhatsApp
Read full review
Software AG
  • Complex logic is hard to understand in simple diagrammatic user interface
  • User interface too simplistic for solutions that are complicated or go against the grain
  • Runtime observability could be improved
Read full review
Usability
Celonis
This would be a rating for a data-centric team or user. If you don't have a lot of experience working with data and systems/tools like Integromat, then it could definitely be a challenge for you. By no means is Integromat the 'entry-level' tool in the connector world. However, if you have the skillset or team to take advantage of everything Integromat offers, it is incredibly user-friendly and straightforward to use.
Read full review
Software AG
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Celonis
The pricing schema is very attractive, almost 50% lower than the competition. You could start from free and then grow. It has a pretty big library of connections to other apps and services, which really helps you when everything is a mess. Integromat has a really easy-to-use interface. You could do almost everything with fewer than 5 clicks. Scenarios (automation steps to complete a routine) have graphics so you can configure them more easily.
Read full review
Software AG
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Celonis
Integromat allows us to do everything we used to do on Zapier but it doesn't limit us to only the popular apps, with Integromat we're integrating custom APIs and we get data from different servers through GET requests and it's exactly what we needed and Zapier couldn't provide it.
Read full review
Software AG
webMethods.io IntegrationDescriptionWe uses webMethods.io Integration to solve some of our application to applications and business to business integration needs. It is the Integration Platform as a Service solution that we use in a mix with our continued use of webMethods Integration Server and Trading Networks on-premises. For any solutions that meet the use cases that we deem an appropriate fit for running in the cloud, we build those solutions using webMethods.io Integration. More specifically, we use webMethods.io Integration to synchronize changes in one application or system, in another application or system, by shipping data mutations via integration messaging and API calls. We also use webMethods.io Integration to integrate with external organizations. Our trading partners and supply chain partners provide APIs that we consume, and vice versa, to notify each other of business process events as they occur in the respective organizations. Please provide some detailed examples of things that webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud) does particularly well. Easy to usePriced competitivelySupports robust and resilient integration solutions please provide some detailed examples of areas where webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud) has room for improvement. These could be features that are hard to use, missing functionality, or just things that you'd like to see done differently. Complex logic is hard to understand in a simple diagrammatic user interface too simplistic for solutions that are complicated or go against the gain runtime observability could be improved please describe some specific scenarios based on your experience where webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud) is well suited, and/or scenarios where it is less appropriate. We don't use webMethods.io Integration for scenarios where we need to integrate to on-premises legacy applications that have limited support for modern security controls such as OAuth 2.0 and transport encryption. Likewise, we don't use it for solutions that involve any of our systems that are controlled by safe-working processes. For those scenarios, of which we have many, we maintain on-premises webMethods Integration Server and Trading Networks instances to build and execute and support and monitor those solutions. This then requires us to hook our on-premises integration platform up to the webMethods.io Integration cloud, to ship messages between the two integration platforms. This all begs the question if a cloud solution cannot be used for all use cases or scenarios that the business has, then why add the complexity of using the cloud at all if you still need to maintain an on-premises solution to support the non-cloud appropriate scenarios. What positive or negative impact (i.e. Return on Investment or ROI) has webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud) had on your overall business objectives?webMethods.io Integration is a cost-effective approach to integration in isolationwebMethods.io Integration as a supplement to on-premises integration is pointless and redundant and just adds complexity to the environment and additional costswebMethods.io Integration is a tough sell for organizations using Microsoft Azure integration products such as Logic AppswebMethods.io Integration has a faster time to market where the use case means standard provided adapters can be used describe how webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud) stacks up against them and why you selected webMethods.io Integration (webMethods Integration Cloud). For any organization which is already using Software AG products on-premises, such as webMethods Integration Server and Trading Networks, or Universal Messaging, evaluating and using webMethods.io Integration is the path of least resistance. It will be incredibly easy for your webMethods team to get up to speed on how to use webMethods.io Integration, and start developing new solutions on it. However in my opinion you should only add cloud to your integration product portfolio if you believe you can move 100% of your integration needs to the cloud. Otherwise, you will need to maintain an on-premises integration solution anyway, which means you end up with a more complex IT landscape by adding cloud to supplement on-premises integration for little benefit in terms of cost, complexity, and resourcing requirements. For organizations that are not already a Software AG shop, you should evaluate webMethods.io Integration on its merits, however, it's usually the right decision to double down on your existing products and vendors if you have no big issues with the current state. This is to say that if you are a Microsoft shop then adding Azure cloud products to your portfolio is pretty much inevitable, and avoiding the complexity of multiple clouds should also be something organizations consider.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Celonis
  • Integromat allows us to save a lot of time by automating some repetitive tasks
Read full review
Software AG
  • webMethods.io Integration is a cost effective approach to integration in isolation
  • webMethods.io Integration as a supplement to on-premises integration is pointless and redundant and just adds complexity to the environment and additional costs
  • webMethods.io Integration is a tough sell for organizations using Microsoft Azure integration products such as Logic Apps
  • webMethods.io Integration has a faster time to market where the use case means standard provided adapters can be used
Read full review
ScreenShots