No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Amazon SQS vs Red Hat AMQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

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

Amazon SQS
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat AMQ
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Amazon SQS is 5.8%, down from 8.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat AMQ is 5.8%, down from 9.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Amazon SQS5.8%
Red Hat AMQ5.8%
Other88.4%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Roberto Costa - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Data & AI Engineer at Imprint
Facilitates seamless queue creation and management for efficient application decoupling
If you need a messaging service to help decouple your application, Amazon SQS would be a smart choice because it's easy to use and very easy to manage Amazon SQS is a simple service to use. If we compare with other solutions such as RabbitMQ for messaging, Amazon SQS is easier to use and easier…
SachinJain - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Technical Specialist at Intuitive Technology Partners
Efficiently manages high availability and fault tolerance for critical systems with user-friendly management features
I have experience with features such as message persistence and fault tolerance because I configured high availability and fault tolerance for the client environment, including active-active and active-passive configurations. I mainly prefer active-active. I created a security feature for user authentication and authorization in Red Hat AMQ using vault. When you enable the vault, then your whole Red Hat AMQ becomes more secure. Management is straightforward. I configured it and created documentation. The operations team takes care of the operation part. I educate them on how to manage access, so they can easily add new people who join the company or manage the people who leave. The benefits of using Red Hat AMQ include easy configuration and monitoring. On the portal, I can monitor how many packets or alerts have been generated or sent to the end user via Red Hat AMQ along with messages or emails. It also shows utilization in the tool. These features also come with other AMQs such as Amazon and IBM.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Amazon SQS is its scalability."
"The most valuable features include the ability to handle a huge number of messages and the presence of a dead letter queue."
"I think the tool is very reliable."
"The dead-letter queue is very helpful in maintaining the messages that come into the queue."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to decouple components."
"We use the tool in interface integrations."
"There is no setup just some easy configuration required."
"The solution is easy to scale and cost-effective."
"I can organize the tool with microservices, which allows me to use it across different services. It is easy to learn."
"AMQ is highly scalable and performs well. It can process a large volume of messages in one second. AMQ and OpenShift are a good combination."
"Reliability is the main criterion for selecting this tool for one of the busiest airports in Mumbai."
"The most valuable feature for us is the operator-based automation that is provided by Streams for infrastructure as well as user and topic management. This saves a lot of time and effort on our part to provide infrastructure. For example, the deployment of infrastructure is reduced from approximately a week to a day."
"From the functionality perspective, 3scale provides a very comparable, if not the same feature set as any leader in the market for API management and the gateway perspective, but with a fraction of the price."
"Red Hat AMQ's best feature is its reliability."
"The self-service aspect is very important for us, and AMQ Streams has enabled us to deliver new services faster, going from days to hours."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
 

Cons

"Packages sometimes have delays in dropping, indicating reliability issues."
"A feature I would like to see in Amazon SQS is the ability to view the content of messages without removing them from the queue."
"I cannot send a message to multiple people simultaneously. It can only be sent to one recipient."
"The primary issue was the increase in costs due to frequent polling for messages."
"As a company that uses IBM solutions, it's difficult to compare Amazon SQS to other solutions. We have been using IBM solutions for a long time and they are very mature in integration and queuing. In my role as an integration manager, I can say that Amazon SQS is designed primarily for use within the Amazon ecosystem and does not have the same level of functionality as IBM MQ or other similar products. It has limited connectivity options and does not easily integrate with legacy systems."
"The cost became an issue, leading us to consider other solutions."
"Sometimes, we have to switch to another component similar to SQS because the patching tool for SQS is relatively slow for us."
"There is room for improvement in handling large-scale data."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"AMQ could be better integrated with Jira and patch management tools."
"The challenge is the multiple components it has. This brings a higher complexity compared to IBM MQ, which is a single complete unit."
"This solution is completely unstable. We lose messages."
"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"The areas for improvement include cost, which is a primary concern."
"There are several areas in this solution that need improvement, including clustering multi-nodes and message ordering."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing of Amazon SQS is reasonable. The first million requests are free every month, and after, it's cost 40 cents for every million requests. There are not any additional fees."
"It's quite expensive."
"Amazon SQS is moderately priced."
"The pricing model is pay-as-you-use. It depends on your usage and configuration."
"SQS's pricing is very good - I would rate it nine out of ten."
"Compared to EC2 and other services, Amazon SQS' pricing is cheaper."
"I rate the tool's pricing a nine out of ten."
"Amazon SQS is more affordable compared to other solutions."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive."
"Red Hat AMQ's pricing could be improved."
"The solution is open-source."
"This is a very cost-effective solution and the pricing is much better than competitors."
"There is a subscription needed for this solution and there are support plans available."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon SQS?
There is nothing I can remember that I would want as new features for Amazon SQS.
What is your primary use case for Amazon SQS?
If you need a messaging service to help decouple your application, Amazon SQS would be a smart choice because it's easy to use and very easy to manage.
What advice do you have for others considering Amazon SQS?
I would recommend Amazon SQS to other people. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution a 10.
What needs improvement with Red Hat AMQ?
The areas for improvement include cost, which is a primary concern. The deployment process is simple, but the cost is very important. Additionally, the management portal should be more user-friendl...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat AMQ?
For use cases for Red Hat AMQ, let's take banking purposes. This depends upon the firm or the service or product company. For example, let's take HDFC Bank or any other bank. Whenever a customer de...
What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat AMQ?
I work primarily with Red Hat. For IBM, I have worked with their channel partner, not directly with IBM. For Amazon, I work with partners only. I am working with one company as a consultant. I also...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Red Hat JBoss A-MQ, Red Hat JBoss AMQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EMS, NASA, BMW, Capital One
E*TRADE, CERN, CenturyLink, AECOM, Sabre Holdings
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon SQS vs. Red Hat AMQ and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.