Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

ActiveMQ vs Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

ActiveMQ
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
13th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of ActiveMQ is 26.1%, up from 22.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Eyob Alemu - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient data flow management with high performance and occasional stability improvements
For high traffic volumes where management time on ActiveMQ is minimal and where the rate of flow from the provider is slower than from the consumer, ActiveMQ offers the highest performance based on our experience. It has been efficient for data flow control between two endpoints, despite occasional unexpected glitches. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
AR
It's scalable and easy to use, and we have local support here in Tunisia
We have an application-presentation layer, and we use JBoss to communicate with the application layer. The interceptors use Active MQ.  JBoss is easy to use, and we have a good partner here in Tunisia to provide local support.  JBoss could add more automation. We have been using JBoss for five…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."
"It’s a JMS broker, so the fact that it can allow for asynchronous communication is valuable."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"We value ActiveMQ for its performance, throughput, and low latency, especially in handling large volumes of data and sequential management of topics."
"Reliable message delivery and mirroring."
"For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery."
"The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"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."
"JBoss is easy to use, and we have a good partner here in Tunisia to provide local support."
 

Cons

"It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues."
"Distributed message processing would be a nice addition."
"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"I would rate the stability a five out of ten because sometimes it gets stuck, and we have to restart it. We"
"I would like the tool to improve compliance and stability. We will encounter issues while using the central applications. In the solution's future releases, I want to control and set limitations for databases."
"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."
"JBoss could add more automation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are no fees because it is open-source."
"ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."
"I think the software is free."
"We use the open-source version."
"We are using the open-source version, so we have not looked at any pricing."
"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."
"It’s open source, ergo free."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
859,579 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
34%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ActiveMQ?
For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery.
What needs improvement with ActiveMQ?
With ActiveMQ there should be more options. If you work with other technologies, for example, Java, there are many options. We can integrate the way we want ActiveMQ. We can create partitions and c...
What is your primary use case for ActiveMQ?
ActiveMQ inside AP is one of those powerful features because we generally use ActiveMQ for acting on incidents which do not involve any human interaction or personal activity. For example, you have...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

AMQ
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc. 
E*TRADE, CERN, CenturyLink, AECOM, Sabre Holdings
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Apache, Salesforce and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software. Updated: June 2025.
859,579 professionals have used our research since 2012.