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

IBM MQ vs MuleSoft Anypoint Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 21, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.4
IBM MQ enhances transaction handling, ensuring data integrity, efficiency, and cost savings in financial operations, with ROI in two years.
Sentiment score
6.2
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform offers ROI by reducing costs, increasing innovation, and leveraging APIs, though pricing may challenge smaller companies.
It's a product which integrates the external systems with internal systems or among the systems themselves, making it an essential technology component required to integrate multiple systems.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.9
IBM MQ support is generally efficient, yet some users desire quicker response times and better expertise for critical issues.
Sentiment score
6.6
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform offers responsive support, praised by premium users, though some find response times slow and use community resources.
We cannot hold on to the project for a long time just to wait for IBM to fix the issues.
The response time for IBM MQ support could be better because when we are using IBM MQ and something goes wrong, support is required as the resource availability of the IBM product is very limited.
With containerized flavors of these products, we are having a tough time dealing with PMRs because the versions are new to IBM.
The Salesforce team offers different levels of support.
The support team is responsive and helpful.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
IBM MQ boasts strong scalability in various environments but faces some integration challenges and licensing resource complications.
Sentiment score
7.5
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform provides scalable cloud solutions, offering auto-scalability and varying costs, suitable for medium to large organizations.
IBM MQ handles many thousands of messages in a second, indicating good scalability.
In our environment, we do not have horizontal scaling for IBM MQ, but as demand increases, we would just vertically scale it.
We've got 12 VMs running, and it's very easy to scale.
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform is quite scalable, and it meets our use cases with no issues preventing implementation.
MuleSoft provides the ability to scale, yet it is costly to do so.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.1
IBM MQ is highly stable and reliable, suitable for complex environments with minimal downtime and strong long-term performance.
Sentiment score
7.7
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform is reliable, stable, with minimal issues, better on-prem scalability, handling low volumes well in large organizations.
We have never had any downtime or crashes since it's been running.
The transaction is always guaranteed with IBM MQ, which is the main reason I have been working with it for fifteen years while dealing with financial transactions or messages.
Otherwise, they're completely stable.
 

Room For Improvement

IBM MQ users seek improvements in security, UI, integration, ease of use, pricing, support, and documentation.
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform needs improvements in error handling, documentation, support, integration, AI, security, and interface for better performance.
Having a graphical user interface would improve usability.
The pricing model for IBM MQ could be more flexible for clients.
They don't meet our standards due to the timing to get a person with knowledge.
MuleSoft is considered expensive, so pricing is a major concern.
When dealing with multiple transactions or trading, the system can lose control, and tracking becomes hectic.
Currently, it uses other standards, but adopting OpenAPI, the standard in the market, would be beneficial.
 

Setup Cost

IBM MQ provides valuable functionality but is costly, making open-source options like RabbitMQ preferable for smaller organizations.
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform's pricing, though complex and costly, is justified by features but may deter smaller organizations.
It's not cheap.
It's possible to get some training, but the cost of this learning is expensive.
The price of IBM MQ is definitely on the higher side.
MuleSoft is considered one of the more expensive products in the market.
I do not know the specific costs, but given that it is part of MuleSoft, I suspect it is not cheap.
The platform reduces manual workload in maintaining infrastructure, but it does come with some cost considerations.
 

Valuable Features

IBM MQ offers reliable message delivery, integration, scalability, robust security, platform compatibility, and efficient handling for high-volume transactions.
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform excels in API management, hybrid integrations, and offers versatile deployment with strong monitoring and user-friendly interface.
These are financial transactions, so we do not want to lose the message at any cost.
There is a saying that for the last 30 years IBM MQ has never been hacked.
It's time-tested, very stable, highly resilient, and has all the features to troubleshoot even if something goes wrong.
The most valuable feature is the full lifecycle management, including Anypoint Designer and Exchange, as well as Discofolio API.
The platform is integrated with Salesforce, making it preferable when using Salesforce products.
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform helps to standardize data integration approaches, making it easier to implement integration projects.
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM MQ
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
173
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (1st), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (1st)
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (1st), Workload Automation (4th), Cloud Data Integration (4th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of IBM MQ is 24.7%, up from 22.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MuleSoft Anypoint Platform is 8.2%, down from 11.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM MQ24.7%
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform8.2%
Other67.1%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

David Pizinger - PeerSpot reviewer
Has faced unexpected VM restarts but continues to deliver messages reliably
I'm not sure if we've utilized IBM MQ's high availability. Our MQ VMs are set up in clusters, and I think our queue managers are set up in pairs. However, I don't know if we actually use any specific high availability features of IBM MQ that are out of the box. We have it architected with high availability because we use F5 load balancers, and everything about our architecture is highly available. I haven't personally used the management tools with IBM MQ, but we do have them, and our middleware folks leverage them. I can't really comment on them because I don't use them myself. I don't think the management tools help optimize message flows, and I'm not really aware of how they help in this. I'm not familiar with dynamic routing for IBM MQ.
Mohan BS - PeerSpot reviewer
A useful tool to integrate applications and for data transformations that need to improve in the area of price and support
The main area where improvements are required in the product revolves around budgeting. The cost of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required, especially when compared to other tools, like Dell Boomi or Oracle. Mule Anypoint Platform is made available with many components, and whether users use them or not depends on their choices. For example, though there is a tool called Anypoint MQ, our organization prefers to pay and use Kafka, as we don't want to use MuleSoft Anypoint MQ. In Mule Anypoint Platform, there needs to be proper segregation to help users identify what they need and don't need, making it an area where users need to be careful when opting for MuleSoft. Mule Anypoint Platform is an integration tool and not an ETL solution. When a user has to deal with a huge number of data, then Mule Anypoint Platform should not be a preferred choice since it can only be used for lightweight purposes revolving around APIs. There is a need to have a clear architectural decision made before opting for Mule Anypoint Platform. When there is a requirement for heavy data transformation, then users need to decide whether to go with Mule Anypoint Platform or any other platform available in the market. Though the tool comes with many useful components, it depends on whether the user plans to use all of its features. Recently, the product has come up with a new feature that is similar to an API catalog. MuleSoft had come up with the UAPIM feature almost eight months to a year ago, which had some concerns in the area of budgeting. Whether you build APIs using Javacore or any other tools, they can be cataloged using MuleSoft's UAPIM feature, for which users need to pay an extra amount, making it an area of concern for users. It would be great if MuleSoft's support team could provide help with the area of Kubernetes.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
35%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
4%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise146
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise29
 

Questions from the Community

What is MQ software?
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 pro...
What are the differences between Apache Kafka and IBM MQ?
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 user...
How does IBM MQ compare with VMware RabbitMQ?
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 protocol...
What advice do you have for others considering Mule Anypoint Platform?
I architected solutions using Oracle SOA/OSB, Spring Boot, MuleSoft Anypoint Platform on cloud / on-premises and hybrid modes; What I see is though if you are an enterprise and have enough money th...
How does TIBCO BusinessWorks compare with Mule Anypoint Platform?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether TIBCO BusinessWorks or Mule Anypoint platform integration and connectivity software was the better fit for us. We decided to go with Mule...
What can Mule Anypoint Platform be used for and what do you use it for most often?
This is a very flexible solution that comes with multiple uses. My organization mostly uses Mule Anypoint Platform for API management, as it lets us build new APIs easily and design new interfaces...
 

Also Known As

WebSphere MQ
Data Integrator, Anypoint MQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
VMware, Gucci, MasterCard, Target, Time Inc, Hershey's, Tesla, Spotify, Office Depot, Intuit, CBS, Amtrak, Salesforce, Gap, Ralph Lauren
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM MQ vs. MuleSoft Anypoint Platform and other solutions. Updated: November 2025.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.