This document compares the integration platforms Mulesoft and BizTalk. It provides an overview of each platform, including Mulesoft's focus on cloud integration and BizTalk's support for on-premise integration. It then compares features such as connectors, extensibility, deployment options, and transaction support. Finally, it outlines some best fit scenarios, concluding that Mulesoft may be better for smaller, cloud-focused integrations while BizTalk is more suitable for complex on-premise and legacy system integrations involving standards like EDI.

1. Battle of the
Integration Platforms
PRESENTED BY:
KIET BUI
MULESOFT

2. Agenda
• The Integration Challenge
• Mulesoft Introduction
• BizTalk Introduction
• Feature Comparison / Strength andWeaknesses
• Best fit scenarios

3. The Integration Challenge
• Data islands in an Enterprise and need for integration
• Bridging the technology gaps
• In the cloud or on premis?
• .Net, Java, Linux?
• Legacy systems / Mainframes?
• Modes of integration
• Real time or batch?
• Long running transactions?

4. Mulesoft Introduction
• A lightweight Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) framework
• Open source product
• Java based but capable of using .Net components
• Uses bridge technology with JSON serialization
• Cloud based using annual subscription pricing model
• Mule Studio, AnyPoint Security, Mule HealthcareToolkit for HL7
• Supports AMQP, JMS (Java) &WMQ (WebSphere)
• Popular for Salesforce integration

5. BizTalk Introduction
• Messaging platform including point to point and ESB capabilities
• Microsoft technology stack and interoperability (.Net / SQL Server)
• On Premis infrastructure and licensing
• WABS is a new cloud based subscription offering, but has different capabilities than
traditional BizTalk Server
• Visual Studio, Admin Console, SQL Management Studio, BizTalk 360
• Bundled Adapters for popular protocols & systems.
• Available third party adapter & Accelerators like SWIFT, HL7, HIPAA
• Popular for on premise / EDI integrations

6. Feature Comparison (1 of 4)
• Mulesoft Connectors  BizTalk Adapters / Accelerators
• No clear winner.We usually see more BizTalk for EDI implementations and
MuleSoft for cloud
• Extensibility
• No clear winner. Both are fairly extensible with custom adapters and connectors
available from 3rd parties as well as the ability to write your own.
• SaaS and Hybrid Deployments
• Mulesoft has the edge. Its offering is more mature for cloud deployments.
Features gaps exist between BTS andWABS

7. Feature Comparison (2 of 4)
• REST, JSON, RAML & API Management
• MuleSoft has the edge with its work onAPI management and RAML
• SWIFT, HL7 & Legacy Systems
• BizTalk has the edge with higher number of adapters and accelerators available.
• Open Source vs Proprietary
• Mostly a cultural preference of organizations.
• Interoperability with .Net & Java Components
• No clear winner. Interoperability is available in both if you really need that. Both
incur bridging and performance penalties.

8. Feature Comparison (3 of 4)
• Rule Engine
• BizTalk has the edge. Ships with its own comprehensive rule engine
• Long RunningTransactions
• BizTalk has the edge. Support LRT out of the box. MuleSoft will need more custom
development.
• EDI, X12, EDIFACT
• BizTalk has the edge. Comes with much better support of these firmats.
• ESB
• BizTalk has the edge. Although a main selling point of MuleSoft, BTS offers better
control and features like creation of itineraries.

9. Feature Comparison (4 of 4)
• Development and AdministrationTooling
• No clear winner but BizTalk has slight advantage in our view due to widely familiar
tools like visual studio.
• Pricing & Infrastructure
• Depends on what you are doing and how much will you use.
• Support
• Tie – multiple tiers of support available from both vendors.
• Innovation
• MuleSoft has the edge. MuleSoft has been actively working on new technologies like
API management and RAML while Microsoft has been slow recently in adding
features / technologies.

10. Feature Comparison (4 of 4)
• Development and AdministrationTooling
• No clear winner but BizTalk has slight advantage in our view due to widely familiar
tools like visual studio.
• Pricing & Infrastructure
• Depends on what you are doing and how much will you use.
• Support
• Tie – multiple tiers of support available from both vendors.
• Innovation
• MuleSoft has the edge. MuleSoft has been actively working on new technologies like
API management and RAML while Microsoft has been slow recently in adding
features / technologies.

11. Best Fit Scenarios (1 of 2)
• Its not a purely technical decision.Your needs, culture, existing legacy
systems and code all play an important role.
• We feel that the hardest parts of an integration solution are these:
• understanding the requirements
• sorting out dependencies
• understanding the pros and cons of different design choices
• Tooling capabilities of a platform is just one part of the decision

12. Best Fit Scenarios (2 of 2)
• Smaller initial investment, low traffic use: MuleSoft
• Lots of legacy systems: BizTalk
• Very high traffic between systems: BizTalk
• Mostly SlaesForce or Cloud or Mobile integrations: MuleSoft
• Mostly enterprise systems like ERP, traditional CRMs: BizTalk
• Have to deal with EDI / X12 etc: BizTalk
• Complex business rules in existing code: BizTalk for .Net, MuleSoft
for Java

13. Battle of the
Integration Platforms
QUESTIONS?
BIZTALK VS. MULESOFT
PRESENTED BY KASHIF AQEEL
T E C H N I C A L M A N A G E R – I N T E G R A T I O N
A A J T E C H N O L O G I E S
6 3 0 1 N W 5 T H W A Y S T E . 1 7 0 0
F T . L A U D E R D A L E , F L 3 3 3 0 9
T E L : 9 5 4 . 6 8 9 . 3 9 8 4