Red Hat AMQ provides robust performance with high scalability and security, supporting efficient message processing and various protocols. It integrates with OpenShift and Apache Kafka, making it ideal for event-driven microservices in hybrid environments.



| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Red Hat AMQ | 7.3% |
| IBM MQ | 21.7% |
| ActiveMQ | 20.5% |
| Other | 50.5% |
| Title | Rating | Mindshare | Recommending | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MuleSoft Anypoint Platform | 4.0 | 6.9% | 92% | 60 interviewsAdd to research |
| IBM MQ | 4.2 | 21.7% | 94% | 174 interviewsAdd to research |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 5 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 2 |
| Large Enterprise | 2 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 46 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 41 |
| Large Enterprise | 138 |
Red Hat AMQ is designed for asynchronous messaging, data synchronization, and real-time notifications. Its strengths include high availability, fault tolerance, and operator-based automation. The lightweight, scalable design enables straightforward management, combined with reliable official support. Integration with ActiveMQ ensures stable and independent installation. Users can also employ connectors and routing on Kubernetes, enhancing its utility for sectors like banking and logistics.
What are the most valuable features of Red Hat AMQ?Industries use Red Hat AMQ for asynchronous application messaging, enhancing communication in Master System Integration projects. Sectors like banking utilize it for real-time alerts, while logistics companies leverage it for notifications. Its support for connectors and routing within OpenShift benefits organizations with complex data flow requirements.
Red Hat AMQ was previously known as Red Hat JBoss A-MQ, Red Hat JBoss AMQ.
E*TRADE, CERN, CenturyLink, AECOM, Sabre Holdings
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Senior Technical Specialist at Intuitive Technology Partners | 4.5 | I use Red Hat AMQ for reliable messaging in banking and logistics, valuing its security, stability, and ease of deployment. While it's costly and the portal could improve, overall, it meets my clients' needs effectively. |
| Java Developer at SCCON | 4.0 | I find Red Hat AMQ easy to learn and beneficial for organizing tools with microservices across different services. However, it could benefit from better documentation and training. I use it with other cloud providers for deployment. |
| Director at Absys | 3.5 | I manage a Master System Integration project using Red Hat AMQ for an airport. We chose it for its flexibility and cost-effectiveness compared to IBM MQ. However, we seek better message monitoring and face complexity due to its multiple components. |
| Sr. Enterprise Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees | 4.5 | I find Red Hat AMQ a stable and performant messaging platform, leveraging Kafka and ActiveMQ with a unified interface. However, its slow adoption of new underlying technology versions means features arrive too slowly for me. |
| Sr. Enterprise Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees | 4.0 | We use Red Hat Integration for messaging and API management, valuing its OpenShift compatibility, official support, and cost-effectiveness. While beneficial, I'd like better visualization tools and found the learning curve somewhat steep. |
| DevOps Solution Architect at Helvetia Versicherungen | 4.5 | I value Red Hat AMQ Streams for its operator automation, excellent support, and good stability/scalability, speeding up service delivery. Despite minor glitches and monitoring needing improvement, it's the best for self-operated systems. |
| Director, CTO, Co-Founder at a tech services company with 11-50 employees | 4.5 | I find Red Hat AMQ highly scalable, lightweight, and easy to manage, crucial for my OpenShift needs. It's reliable with easy setup. My main concern is the need to update support libraries. I rate it nine out of ten. |
| Solution Architect at Vlaanderen connect. | 2.0 | I've experienced significant instability and message loss with this message queuing solution, finding clustering and message ordering problematic. Technical support was unhelpful, though our poor infrastructure might contribute to issues. I rate it 4/10. |