Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Apache Logo
12,584 views|7,170 comparisons
IBM Logo
15,403 views|10,350 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary
Updated on Mar 6, 2024

We compared IBM MQ and ActiveMQ based on our user's reviews in several parameters.

IBM MQ is highly praised for its reliability, scalability, security, and integration capabilities, along with positive remarks on customer service and pricing. On the other hand, ActiveMQ is valued for its efficient messaging, integration, and versatility, with notable customer service. However, areas for improvement include documentation, interface, and stability/performance issues.

Features: IBM MQ is praised for its reliability, scalability, security, and ease of integration, while ActiveMQ offers reliable messaging, seamless integration, efficient message handling, versatile configuration, and robust support for messaging protocols.

Pricing and ROI: IBM MQ is praised for its reasonable and cost-effective pricing structure, manageable setup costs, and user-friendly licensing process. On the other hand, ActiveMQ is commended for its favorable pricing structure, minimal setup costs, and positive user experiences with the licensing process., IBM MQ has been praised for enhancing efficiency, improving communication and integration, streamlining workflows, and reducing downtime. Users appreciated its reliability, scalability, and ease of use. This resulted in cost savings and increased productivity. On the other hand, ActiveMQ was commended for its reliability, performance, and ease of use. It improved messaging capabilities, increased efficiency, and offered seamless integration. Both products seem to have provided positive ROI.

Room for Improvement: IBM MQ has been identified by users as needing enhancements in certain areas, while ActiveMQ could benefit from improved documentation, a more intuitive user interface, and increased stability and performance.

Deployment and customer support: IBM MQ and ActiveMQ have different user experiences when it comes to the duration required for establishing new tech solutions. While some IBM MQ users reported a range of three months to one week for deployment and setup, ActiveMQ users reported spending several months on deployment and an additional week on setup, but some were able to complete both in just one week., IBM MQ's customer service is highly regarded for its promptness, effectiveness, expertise, and reliability. Users appreciate the help they receive from the support team. ActiveMQ's customer service is praised for being responsive, helpful, and exceeding expectations. Users value the prompt resolution of concerns and the knowledge of the support team.

The summary above is based on 29 interviews we conducted recently with IBM MQ and ActiveMQ users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveMQ vs. IBM MQ Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Q&A Highlights
Question: What Is The Biggest Difference Between ActiveMQ and IBM MQ?
Answer: ActiveMQ offers very high throughput and low latency compared to IBM MQ. ActiveMQ supports standard messaging protocols like AMQP, STOMP, MQTT etc whereas IBM MQ just comply with JMS and its own protocol. IBM MQ Light supports AMQP though. IBM MQ is much preferred in enterprise environment, probably due to the support. Redhat AMQ offers enterprise support on ActiveMQ. AFAIK documentation wise, they are at par. Both support clustering. But only in ActiveMQ real storage of messages in another broker which is less loaded happens. IBM MQ just enables communication between Queue managers. But I would prefer to put a few more options on the table. 1. RabbitMQ - fully compliant with protocols, supports replication and distribution of messages, throughput in tens of thousands 2. Redis - Light weight single threaded server. Supports pub sub messaging and supports HA via sentinel and clustering for distributed messaging 3. Kafka - Preferred mechanism for data streaming. Throughput in millions. 4. ZeroMQ - Brokerless messaging platform. Very high throughput. 5. NanoMsg - Brokerless. Claims to be advanced than ZeroMQ
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick.""I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great.""Most people or many people recommended using ActiveMQ on small and medium-scale applications.""Message broadcasting: There could be a use case sending the same message to all consumers. So as a producer, I broadcast the message to a topic. Then, whichever consumers are subscribed to the topic can consume the same message.""It provides the best support services.""The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes.""The most valuable feature of this solution is the holding and forwarding.""I am impressed with the tool’s latency. Also, the messages in ActiveMQ wait in a queue. The messages will start to move when the system reopens after getting stuck."

More ActiveMQ Pros →

"We like IBM MQ for our synchronous communications and transactional applications that require a lot of CPS.""The MQ protocol is widely used across multiple applications and it's so simple for connectivity.""Integrates between distributed systems: For example, it can help integrate processing between mainframe, client-server, web-based applications by integrating the messages, supporting Service Oriented Architecture.""The clusterization which results in persistence is the most valuable feature.""We use queue managers/concentrators for message flow going upstream and downstream on applications with enterprise licenses.""We have implemented business to business transactions over MQ messaging. The guaranteed and once only delivery ensures business integrity.""Reliable integration between MQ servers is the most valuable feature.""Reliable messaging and throughput are the most valuable."

More IBM MQ Pros →

Cons
"From the TPS point of view, it's like 100,000 transactions that need to be admitted from different devices and also from the different minor small systems. Those are best fit for Kafka. We have used it on the customer side, and we thought of giving a try to ActiveMQ, but we have to do a lot of performance tests and approval is required before we can use it for this scale.""There are some stability issues.""The tool needs to improve its installation part which is lengthy. The product is already working on that aspect so that the complete installation gets completed within a month.""The solution's stability needs improvement.""The clustering for sure needs improvement. When we were using it, the only thing available was an active/passive relationship that had to be maintained via shared file storage. That model includes a single point of failure in that storage medium.""Distributed message processing would be a nice addition.""This solution could improve by providing better documentation.""The solution can improve the other protocols to equal the AMQ protocol they offer."

More ActiveMQ Cons →

"They have provided a Liberty Profile in the Web Console for administration, and that could be further enhanced. It is not fit for use by an enterprise. They have to get rid of their WebSphere process and develop a front-end on Node.js or the like.""I have used the support from IBM MQ. There is some room for improvement.""What could be improved is the high-availability. The way MQ works is that it separates the high-availability from the workload balance. The scalability should be easier. If something happens so that the messages are not available on each node, scalability is only possible for the workload balance.""I would like to see it integrate with the newer ways of messaging, such as Kafka. They might say that you have IBM Integration Bus to do that stuff, but it would be great if MQ could, out-of-the-box, listen to public Kafka.""I believe there is too much code to be done in order to handle the elements that you develop.""I believe the stability of the product has decreased since we began using it initially.""The GUI part could be better.""There are things within the actual product itself that can be improved, such as limitations on message length, size, etc. There is no standardized message length outside of IBM. Each of the implementations of the MQ series or support of that functionality varies between various suppliers, and because of that, it is very difficult to move from one to the other. We have IBM MQ, but we couldn't use it because the platform that was speaking to MQ didn't support the message length that was standard within IBM MQ. So, we had to use a different product to do exactly the same thing. So, perhaps, there could be more flexibility in the standards around the message queue. If we had been able to increase the message queue size within the IBM MQ implementation, we wouldn't have had to go over to another competing product because the system that was using MQ messaging required the ability to hold messages that were far larger than the IBM MQ standard. So, there could be a bit more flexibility in the structuring. It has as such nothing to do with the IBM implementation of MQ. It is just that the standard that is being put out onto the market doesn't actually stipulate those types of things."

More IBM MQ Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "I use open source with standard Apache licensing."
  • "It’s open source, ergo free."
  • "I think the software is free."
  • "We are using the open-source version, so we have not looked at any pricing."
  • "There are no fees because it is open-source."
  • "We use the open-source version."
  • "ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."
  • "The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."
  • More ActiveMQ Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It's super expensive, so ask them if they can consolidate some other licensing costs. But, IBM is IBM, so I guess we'll pay for it."
  • "IBM MQ has a flexible license model based on the Processor Value Unit (PVU) and I recommend it."
  • "Use the new and lightweight version (Liberty) to lower licensing costs. It is also easier to upgrade/maintain."
  • "I think the pricing is reasonable, especially with IIB as a part of it."
  • "Pricing could be better, as with all IBM products. But their performance in production, along with security and scalability, will pay returns in the long run."
  • "99.999 percent availability for less than a penny per message over the past 25 years. IBM MQ is the cheapest software in the IBM software portfolio, and it is one of the best."
  • "IBM MQ appliance has pricing options, but they are costly."
  • "In terms of cost, IBM MQ is slightly on the higher side."
  • More IBM MQ Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Answers from the Community
    Miriam Tover
    Jack Angoe - PeerSpot reviewerJack Angoe
    Real User

    From my Experience so far i will go for RabbitMQ its rock solid and robust with a simple learning curve. Its free and has great documentation available

    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable.
    Top Answer:Everybody is now moving from ActiveMQ to Apache Kafka or RabbitMQ. Apache Kafka is much higher in terms of scalability and stability; it's way ahead. So, there is room for improvement in terms of… more »
    Top Answer:We used it for communication between microservices. For example, if service one makes an update and service two needs to be aware of it, and it doesn't need to be synchronous, it can handle that later… more »
    Top Answer:Hi As someone with 45+ years of experience in the Transaction and Message Processing world, I have seen many "MQ" solutions that have come into the market place. From my perspective, while each… more »
    Top Answer:Apache Kafka is open source and can be used for free. It has very good log management and has a way to store the data used for analytics. Apache Kafka is very good if you have a high number of users… more »
    Top Answer:IBM MQ has a great reputation behind it, and this solution is very robust with great stability. It is easy to use, simple to configure and integrates well with our enterprise ecosystem and protocols… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    12,584
    Comparisons
    7,170
    Reviews
    8
    Average Words per Review
    383
    Rating
    7.5
    Views
    15,403
    Comparisons
    10,350
    Reviews
    20
    Average Words per Review
    424
    Rating
    8.6
    Comparisons
    Anypoint MQ logo
    Compared 19% of the time.
    Red Hat AMQ logo
    Compared 13% of the time.
    VMware RabbitMQ logo
    Compared 9% of the time.
    Apache Kafka logo
    Compared 8% of the time.
    Amazon SQS logo
    Compared 7% of the time.
    Apache Kafka logo
    Compared 26% of the time.
    VMware RabbitMQ logo
    Compared 11% of the time.
    Amazon SQS logo
    Compared 6% of the time.
    Red Hat AMQ logo
    Compared 6% of the time.
    Anypoint MQ logo
    Compared 5% of the time.
    Also Known As
    AMQ
    WebSphere MQ
    Learn More
    Overview

    Apache ActiveMQ is the most popular and powerful open source messaging and Integration Patterns server.

    Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License

      IBM MQ is a middleware product used to send or exchange messages across multiple platforms, including applications, systems, files, and services via MQs (messaging queues). This solution helps simplify the creation of business applications, and also makes them easier to maintain. IBM MQ is security-rich, has high performance, and provides a universal messaging backbone with robust connectivity. In addition, it also integrates easily with existing IT assets by using an SOA (service oriented architecture).

      IBM MQ can be deployed:

      • On-premises
      • In the cloud
      • Hybrid cloud

      IBM MQ supports the following APIs:

      • MQI (Message Queue Interface)
      • REST
      • .NET
      • MQTT
      • JMS
      • IBM MQ Light


      IBM MQ Features

      Some of the most powerful IBM MQ features include:

      • High availability
      • Stability and scalability
      • Flexible deployment options
      • Uniform clusters
      • Automated and intelligent workload balancing
      • Broad language, API, and messaging protocol support
      • Administrative features that simplify messaging management
      • Open standards development tools
      • Simple management tools

      IBM MQ Benefits

      Some of the benefits of using IBM MQ include:

      • Multi-style messaging: IBM MQ supports simple multi-style messaging, making it easy to connect diverse systems with support for message queuing, transactions, and more.

      • Reduced risk: With IBM MQ you will never lose a message, and messages are never delivered more than once.

      • Cloud-native: Because IBM MQ has a minimal infrastructure, it is suitable to be cloud-native, and therefore has the capability to always remain on.

      • Available anywhere: Using IBM MQ, you have access to secure messaging anywhere, at any time.

      • Secure: IBM MQ makes sure to keep your data safe by using TLS secured communications, providing access identity management, message-level security, and more measures to protect your information.

      • Easy for application programmers: To use IBM MQ, application programmers do not need to have any knowledge of communications programming.

      • Technical support: IBM MQ has a large user community and also provides support 24/7 as needed.

      Reviews from Real Users

      Below are some reviews and helpful feedback written by IBM MQ users who are currently using the solution.

      PeerSpot user Sunil S., a manager at a financial services firm, explains that they never lose messages are never lost in transit, mentioning that he can store messages and forward them as required: "Whenever payments are happening, such as incoming payments to the bank, we need to notify the customer. With MQ we can actually do that asynchronously. We don't want to notify the customer for each and every payment but, rather, more like once a day. That kind of thing can be enabled with the help of MQ."

      Another PeerSpot reviewer, Luis L. who is a solutions director at Thesys Technologies, says that IBM MQ is a valuable solution and is "A stable and reliable software that offers good integration between different systems."

      The head of operations at a financial services firm notes that "I have found the solution to be very robust. It has a strong reputation, is easy to use, simple to configure in our enterprise software, and supports all the protocols that we use."

      In addition, a Software Engineer at a financial services firm praises the security benefits of it and states that “it has the most security features I've seen in a communication solution. Security is the most important thing for our purposes."

    Sample Customers
    University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc. 
    Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm42%
    Transportation Company17%
    Energy/Utilities Company8%
    Computer Software Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Government6%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm39%
    Retailer10%
    Insurance Company9%
    Computer Software Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm37%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Manufacturing Company5%
    Government4%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise63%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise8%
    Large Enterprise77%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business9%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise82%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise76%
    Buyer's Guide
    ActiveMQ vs. IBM MQ
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveMQ vs. IBM MQ and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    ActiveMQ is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 23 reviews while IBM MQ is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 156 reviews. ActiveMQ is rated 7.8, while IBM MQ is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of ActiveMQ writes "Allows for asynchronous communication, enabling services to operate independently but issues with stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "Reliable and stable solution that includes support from the IBM technical team". ActiveMQ is most compared with Anypoint MQ, Red Hat AMQ, VMware RabbitMQ, Apache Kafka and Amazon SQS, whereas IBM MQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, VMware RabbitMQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ and Anypoint MQ. See our ActiveMQ vs. IBM MQ report.

    See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.

    We monitor all Message Queue (MQ) Software 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.