API & Integration Modernization Services
UpdatedBuyer-focused comparison of iPaaS platforms, API gateway vendors, and ESB retirement specialists. Independent ratings by verified project outcomes — covering MuleSoft, Boomi, Workato, Confluent, and Kong across ESB retirement, event-driven architecture, and API monetization engagements.
When to Hire API & Integration Modernization Services
Hire API and integration modernization services when legacy ESB licensing costs exceed cloud-native alternatives, when point-to-point integrations have grown beyond 20 connections, or when a new SaaS acquisition requires rapid, governed connectivity across your application portfolio.
- Legacy ESB (IBM MQ, TIBCO, WebSphere) is blocking new integrations or costing $300K+/year in licensing — the economics no longer justify the constraint
- Point-to-point integrations have grown beyond 20 connections — the spaghetti threshold where undocumented dependencies make every change a production risk
- A new SaaS acquisition requires rapid integration (Salesforce, NetSuite, Workday) and internal teams lack the connector depth or capacity to deliver it
- API monetization or partner ecosystem exposure is a strategic priority — and requires API lifecycle management, versioning, and gateway tooling beyond what internal teams currently own
Engagement Model Matrix
| MODEL | BEST FIT | TYPICAL PROFILE |
|---|---|---|
| DIY | Boomi or Zapier for straightforward SaaS-to-SaaS connectivity | <50 integrations, single-cloud, <500 employees |
| Guided | iPaaS vendor + SI partner for hybrid stack with governance requirements | 50–200 integrations, mixed on-prem/cloud stack |
| Full-Service | MuleSoft or Confluent + specialist SI for event-driven or API monetization | 200+ integrations, event-driven or multi-cloud |
Why API & Integration Engagements Fail
API and integration modernization projects fail in three predictable patterns: using expensive iPaaS as a batch ETL tool, replacing the ESB with ungoverned microservices, and committing to ESB retirement scope before completing an integration inventory.
MuleSoft-as-ETL Trap
Teams use expensive iPaaS for nightly batch file loads instead of real-time API orchestration — recreating spaghetti architecture on a $500K/year license. The platform is technically capable but architecturally misapplied from day one.
Prevention: Mandate API-led connectivity patterns in the RFP. Require a sample architecture review that demonstrates the three-layer model (system, process, experience APIs) before contract signature.
API Sprawl Without Governance
The ESB is replaced with 40 ungoverned microservices and no API catalog. Each team builds its own integration patterns, naming conventions are inconsistent, and within 18 months the organisation has recreated point-to-point complexity — just with REST instead of SOAP.
Prevention: Require an API governance plan and catalog tooling (Kong, AWS API Gateway, Apigee) explicitly in scope. Governance cannot be a post-launch phase.
ESB Retirement Scope Explosion
Undocumented integrations discovered mid-project double the scope. One documented case: a retailer discovered 140 undocumented integrations after committing to a 6-month ESB retirement timeline — an engagement that ultimately took 22 months and exceeded budget by 80%.
Prevention: Integration inventory audit is Phase 1, not optional. Any vendor who proposes a migration timeline without a completed inventory is underquoting to win the deal.
Vendor Intelligence
Independent comparison of iPaaS platforms, API gateways, and event streaming vendors. Search all 170+ vendors.
The right iPaaS platform depends on integration count, company size, and whether the primary use case is SaaS connectivity, ESB replacement, or event streaming. Platform selection locks in architecture and cost structure for 5+ years — get it wrong and migration cost exceeds the original ESB spend.
How we evaluate: Ratings are based on verified project outcomes submitted by implementation engineers, not analyst briefings or vendor-supplied references. We weight delivery velocity, Day-2 operational cost, and client escalation frequency. Vendors are re-evaluated quarterly.
Top API & Integration Companies
| Company | Specialty | Cost | Our Rating ↓ | Case Studies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Workato | AI-ready orchestration, fastest delivery cycle | $$$ | ★4.4 | 28 |
| Confluent (Kafka) | Managed Kafka for event-driven architecture | $$$ | ★4.4 | 31 |
| MuleSoft Anypoint | Enterprise API-led connectivity & ESB replacement | $$$$ | ★4.3 | 44 |
| Kong Inc. | API gateway & service mesh | $$ | ★4.3 | 22 |
| Boomi | Mid-market hybrid cloud iPaaS | $$$ | ★4.2 | 36 |
| Celigo | Mid-market SaaS-to-SaaS (NetSuite, Salesforce) | $$ | ★4.2 | 16 |
| Informatica IDMC | Data-heavy integration + MDM combined | $$$$ | ★4.1 | 26 |
| WSO2 | Open-source API management & AI gateway | $$ | ★4.1 | 18 |
| Apigee (Google Cloud) | API monetization & lifecycle management | $$$ | ★4.0 | 19 |
| IBM App Connect | IBM MQ / TIBCO migration & legacy coexistence | $$$ | ★3.9 | 21 |
AI-ready orchestration, fastest delivery cycle
Managed Kafka for event-driven architecture
Enterprise API-led connectivity & ESB replacement
API gateway & service mesh
Mid-market hybrid cloud iPaaS
Mid-market SaaS-to-SaaS (NetSuite, Salesforce)
Data-heavy integration + MDM combined
Open-source API management & AI gateway
API monetization & lifecycle management
IBM MQ / TIBCO migration & legacy coexistence
iPaaS Market Share 2026
Distribution of iPaaS and API integration platform adoption across enterprise modernization projects.
iPaaS / API Integration Platform Market Share 2026
iPaaS Platform Comparison: 2026
Only 58% of IT leaders have adopted API-led strategies. The platform decision shapes 5+ years of integration architecture and cost structure.
| PLATFORM | BEST FOR | PRICING (ENTRY) | KEY DIFFERENTIATOR |
|---|---|---|---|
| MuleSoft Anypoint | Large enterprise, Salesforce-heavy, API productization | ~$150K+/yr, scales to $500K+ | 3-layer API-led model, largest connector library, Anypoint Exchange for API publishing |
| Boomi | Mid-market, hybrid cloud, strong data quality | ~$5K/connector/yr | Atom architecture for on-premise/cloud hybrid, built-in data quality and MDM tooling |
| Workato | Mid-to-large enterprise, AI-ready, business technologists | ~$10K/yr base, scales with usage | 4–10× faster delivery vs MuleSoft, agentic orchestration for AI workflows, 20–65% lower TCO |
| Informatica IDMC | Data-heavy enterprises, governance-focused | Enterprise contract | Master data management + integration combined; strongest data governance tooling |
| Celigo | Mid-market, SaaS-to-SaaS (NetSuite, Salesforce) | ~$30K–$80K/yr | ERP-centric connector depth, simpler licensing model, lower TCO than MuleSoft at mid-market scale |
| Zapier Enterprise | SMB to lower mid-market, citizen integrators | ~$20/user/mo | 7,000+ app connectors, no-code friendly; limited complex orchestration logic |
Company Size Decision Guide
| COMPANY SIZE | RECOMMENDATION |
|---|---|
| <500 employees | Zapier Enterprise or Celigo |
| 500–2,000 employees | Boomi or Workato |
| 2,000–10,000 employees | Workato or MuleSoft — evaluate TCO |
| 10,000+ employees, Salesforce-heavy | MuleSoft has genuine advantages |
| Unique protocols / extreme throughput | Custom integration still viable |
The MuleSoft Trap
The most common failure mode of API-led connectivity projects is teams using MuleSoft like a batch ETL engine — scheduling nightly file loads and database syncs — instead of real-time, reusable API orchestration. This produces the same spaghetti architecture it was supposed to replace, on a $150K–$500K+/year license.
Workato customers migrating from MuleSoft report 20–65% lower TCO. A documented case study: a 5,000-person gaming company achieved $19M in application rationalization savings and $441K in iPaaS TCO reduction, building 70+ integrations in 8 months.
API-Led Connectivity: Published Results (Forrester 2025)
Vendor Selection: Red Flags & Interview Questions
API and integration vendors who cannot articulate a discovery process for undocumented integrations, or who propose iPaaS for simple file-sync workloads, are signalling architectural overreach. These five red flags eliminate the highest-risk proposals before reference checks.
Five Red Flags
"MuleSoft does everything" without alternatives analysis — a $500K+/year vendor lock-in decision made without TCO comparison across Boomi, Workato, or platform-native options is a signal the vendor has a MuleSoft partnership, not your interests.
No API governance plan in the proposal — replacing the ESB without a catalog, design standards, and gateway is replacing one form of technical debt with another. If governance is described as a future phase, it will never happen.
Proposes iPaaS for file-based or database sync workloads — using a $150K+/year orchestration platform for overnight CSV transfers is over-engineering. Simpler ETL or direct database replication costs 10–20× less.
Fixed-price contract for ESB retirement — undocumented integrations make fixed-price ESB retirement impossible to scope accurately. Any vendor offering fixed-price without a completed integration inventory has priced in scope creep — and is planning to charge for it as change orders.
No integration inventory or discovery phase before committing to a migration plan — a vendor who can give you a migration timeline before auditing your current integrations is either inexperienced or deliberately underquoting.
Five Interview Questions to Ask Shortlisted Vendors
- 01
"Show us an integration inventory process — how do you discover undocumented integrations, and what tools do you use to catalogue them?"
- 02
"What's your criteria for recommending iPaaS vs API gateway vs service mesh — and at what integration count does each recommendation change?"
- 03
"Have you migrated a client off MuleSoft? What triggered the switch and what was the outcome — specifically the TCO delta at 12 months post-migration?"
- 04
"What API governance framework do you recommend at our scale, and what does Day 2 operations look like — who owns the catalog, who approves new APIs, and how are breaking changes managed?"
- 05
"How do you handle ESB batch jobs in an API-led architecture — specifically overnight batch processing that can't be converted to synchronous API calls?"
What a Typical API & Integration Engagement Looks Like
A full ESB retirement engagement runs 8–9 months for 50–150 integrations when a complete inventory is in place on Day 1. Projects without a pre-built inventory average 40% schedule overrun — making the discovery phase the most important investment in the programme.
| PHASE | TIMELINE | KEY ACTIVITIES |
|---|---|---|
| 1 — Integration Inventory Audit | Weeks 1–4 | Discover and document all existing integrations, including undocumented batch jobs and SOAP services. Produce integration register with business owner, criticality, and dependency map. |
| 2 — Architecture Design | Weeks 5–12 | Platform selection (iPaaS, API gateway, service mesh), API design patterns and naming standards, governance framework, integration wave prioritisation by business impact. |
| 3 — Migration Waves | Weeks 13–28 | Prioritised migration by business impact. Parallel run period for critical integrations — both old and new run simultaneously until the new integration is validated in production. |
| 4 — ESB Decommission | Weeks 29–36 | Final validation, performance and load testing against ESB baseline, cutover execution, ESB licence termination and cost recovery confirmation. |
Key Deliverables
- Integration inventory register — complete catalogue of all integrations with business owner, criticality rating, dependency map, and ESB vs. API routing decision
- API design standards — naming conventions, versioning policy, error codes, authentication requirements, and breaking-change management process
- Governance catalog setup — API catalog provisioned in Kong, Apigee, or AWS API GW with initial APIs registered and access policies defined
- 3-layer architecture diagram — system, process, and experience API layers documented with integration patterns for each layer
- ESB decommission plan and runbooks — per-integration runbooks covering cutover sequence, rollback procedure, and validation criteria
Frequently Asked Questions: API & Integration Modernization
Q1 How much does an ESB-to-iPaaS migration cost?
ESB retirement projects typically run $200K–$800K depending on integration count. The primary variable is undocumented integrations discovered during inventory — projects with 50–100 integrations average $250K; those with 200+ commonly exceed $600K. MuleSoft licensing alone is $150K–$500K/year; Boomi or Workato typically saves $50K–$200K/year in licensing TCO.
Q2 MuleSoft vs Boomi vs Workato — which is right for us?
Company size is the primary determinant. Under 2,000 employees: Boomi or Workato. 2,000–10,000: Workato typically offers 20–65% lower TCO than MuleSoft. 10,000+ employees with Salesforce-heavy workloads: MuleSoft's connectors justify the premium. Workato customers migrating from MuleSoft report 20–65% TCO reduction and 4–10x faster delivery.
Q3 How long does ESB retirement take?
3–12 months depending on integration count and undocumented complexity. Engagements with a complete integration inventory from Day 1 run on time; those without average 40% schedule overrun. ESBs with undocumented batch jobs or legacy SOAP services consistently extend timelines.
Q4 What's the difference between iPaaS and an API gateway?
iPaaS orchestrates workflows and data transformation across applications (Boomi, Workato, MuleSoft). An API gateway manages API traffic, security, and rate limiting (Kong, Apigee, AWS API GW). Service mesh handles service-to-service communication in microservices. Most enterprises need all three at different layers — a common mistake is buying iPaaS when the actual need is an API gateway.
Q5 Can we modernize APIs without replacing the ESB?
Yes — the strangler fig pattern wraps the ESB with API facades, routing new integrations to modern infrastructure while legacy integrations continue through the ESB. This reduces risk but extends the timeline by 6–12 months and maintains dual-running costs. Recommended for organisations with 200+ integrations or limited change tolerance.
Q6 What API governance do we need from Day 1?
An API catalog (to prevent sprawl), design standards (naming conventions, versioning policy, error codes), and a gateway with rate limiting and authentication. Projects that skip governance create the same point-to-point complexity they were trying to escape — just with REST APIs instead of SOAP services.