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

Apache Kafka vs IBM MQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 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
6.3
Apache Kafka boosts efficiency and insights with customizable, cost-effective data processing, enhancing analytics and decision-making in many applications.
Sentiment score
6.1
IBM MQ is valued for reliability and cost savings, with returns within two years despite unclear direct financial impact.
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.
Dev lead at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
5.8
Apache Kafka support relies on community help; paid options like Confluent offer better but occasionally slow assistance.
Sentiment score
6.9
IBM MQ support is responsive with quick issue resolution, but some users experience delays in accessing skilled assistance.
The Apache community provides support for the open-source version.
Technology Leader at eTCaaS
There is plenty of community support available online.
With Microsoft, expectations are higher because we pay for a license and have a contract.
Senior Manager at Timestamp, SA
We cannot hold on to the project for a long time just to wait for IBM to fix the issues.
Dev lead at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
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.
Senior System Analyst at Thakral
With containerized flavors of these products, we are having a tough time dealing with PMRs because the versions are new to IBM.
Software Engineer IV at Royal Cyber Inc.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Apache Kafka excels in scalable data handling, efficiently managing growth despite occasional challenges in adjustments and resource management.
Sentiment score
7.5
IBM MQ is scalable and suitable for enterprises, though some note challenges with modernization and automation compared to cloud-native solutions.
Customers have not faced issues with user growth or data streaming needs.
Technology Leader at eTCaaS
I need to enable my solution with high availability and scalability.
Solution Architect at Ascendion
IBM MQ handles many thousands of messages in a second, indicating good scalability.
Senior Software Test Analyst at CoCre8 Technology Solutions
In our environment, we do not have horizontal scaling for IBM MQ, but as demand increases, we would just vertically scale it.
Software Engineer IV at Royal Cyber Inc.
We've got 12 VMs running, and it's very easy to scale.
Enterprise Technical Leader at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Apache Kafka is stable and reliable, though configuration complexities and evolving APIs may pose occasional challenges.
Sentiment score
8.1
IBM MQ is praised for stability, reliability, efficient message handling, and performance across complex environments despite occasional external issues.
Apache Kafka is stable.
Technology Leader at eTCaaS
This feature of Apache Kafka has helped enhance our system stability when handling high volume data.
DevOps Engineer
Apache Kafka is a mature product and can handle a massive amount of data in real time for data consumption.
Solution Architect at Ascendion
We have never had any downtime or crashes since it's been running.
Senior Software Test Analyst at CoCre8 Technology Solutions
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.
Software Engineer IV at Royal Cyber Inc.
Otherwise, they're completely stable.
Enterprise Technical Leader at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
 

Room For Improvement

Users seek easier setup, improved UI, better documentation, monitoring, and memory management for Apache Kafka, addressing complexity and scalability.
IBM MQ users seek enhanced security, cloud integration, intuitive interfaces, performance improvements, lower pricing, and active-active clustering.
The performance angle is critical, and while it works in milliseconds, the goal is to move towards microseconds.
Technology Leader at eTCaaS
We are always trying to find the best configs, which is a challenge.
Team Lead, Data Engineering at Nesine.com
A more user-friendly interface and better management consoles with improved documentation could be beneficial.
Having a graphical user interface would improve usability.
Senior Software Test Analyst at CoCre8 Technology Solutions
The pricing model for IBM MQ could be more flexible for clients.
Senior System Analyst at Thakral
They don't meet our standards due to the timing to get a person with knowledge.
Information Technology Solution Consultant
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise users weigh open-source Apache Kafka's low cost against expensive cloud solutions like Confluent, requiring careful cost analysis.
IBM MQ's pricing is high compared to open-source alternatives, though enterprise agreements and flexible licensing can reduce costs.
The open-source version of Apache Kafka results in minimal costs, mainly linked to accessing documentation and limited support.
Technology Leader at eTCaaS
Its pricing is reasonable.
It's not cheap.
Enterprise Technical Leader at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
It's possible to get some training, but the cost of this learning is expensive.
SWIFT manager at Raiffeisen Bank Aval
The price of IBM MQ is definitely on the higher side.
Dev lead at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
 

Valuable Features

Apache Kafka offers scalable, reliable real-time streaming, integration with Spark, robust architecture, and strong community support for customization.
IBM MQ offers reliable message delivery, scalability, integration, security, and ease of use, ensuring data integrity across diverse platforms.
Apache Kafka is effective when dealing with large volumes of data flowing at high speeds, requiring real-time processing.
Apache Kafka is particularly valuable for managing high levels of transactions.
Senior Manager at Timestamp, SA
It allows the use of data in motion, allowing data to propagate from one source to another while it is in motion.
Technology Leader at eTCaaS
These are financial transactions, so we do not want to lose the message at any cost.
Software Engineer IV at Royal Cyber Inc.
There is a saying that for the last 30 years IBM MQ has never been hacked.
Senior System Analyst at Thakral
It's time-tested, very stable, highly resilient, and has all the features to troubleshoot even if something goes wrong.
Dev lead at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache Kafka
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (7th)
IBM MQ
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
174
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (1st), Message Queue (MQ) Software (1st), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

Apache Kafka and IBM MQ aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Apache Kafka is designed for Streaming Analytics and holds a mindshare of 3.8%, up 2.2% compared to last year.
IBM MQ, on the other hand, focuses on Message Queue (MQ) Software, holds 22.5% mindshare, down 22.9% since last year.
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Apache Kafka3.8%
Apache Flink12.3%
Databricks10.0%
Other73.9%
Streaming Analytics
Message Queue (MQ) Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM MQ22.5%
ActiveMQ22.4%
Red Hat AMQ9.5%
Other45.6%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Q&A Highlights

NC
Content Manager at PeerSpot
Sep 04, 2023
 

Featured Reviews

Bruno da Silva - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager at Timestamp, SA
Have worked closely with the team to deploy streaming and transaction pipelines in a flexible cloud environment
The interface of Apache Kafka could be significantly better. I started working with Apache Kafka from its early days, and I have seen many improvements. The back office functionality could be enhanced. Scaling up continues to be a challenge, though it is much easier now than it was in the beginning.
MK
SWIFT manager at Raiffeisen Bank Aval
Reliable payment processing is achieved with minimal disruption
Currently, we have some disadvantages; it's a bit difficult to use IBM ID to access support from the IBM site. To get nice support from IBM, we need to use IBM ID, and it's a bit complicated to integrate it with IBM support. Support can be better because sometimes we need explanations for some behaviors of the product, and it's not easy to reach the proper person in IBM support. They could add some new features into IBM MQ to make it better. A graphical user interface in addition to MQ Explorer could be useful, but we are satisfied with MQ Explorer as well.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
880,490 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

NC
Content Manager at PeerSpot
Sep 4, 2023
Sep 4, 2023
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. This tool has great scalability with high throughput and a very helpful supportive online community. However, Kafka does not provide control over the message queue, so it is difficult to know wheth...
2 out of 3 answers
Oct 31, 2021
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. This tool has great scalability with high throughput and a very helpful supportive online community. However, Kafka does not provide control over the message queue, so it is difficult to know whether messages are being delivered, lost, or duplicated. We would like to see more adapters for connecting to different systems made available. I think this would be a better product if the graphical user interface was easier. The manual calculations needed for this solution can be difficult. If the process was automated, it would be a much better product. IBM MQ has a very strong reputation and is very robust with great stability. This solution is easy to use, simple to configure, and integrates well with our enterprise ecosystem and protocols. IBM ensures message delivery. You can track and trace everything. If a message doesn’t arrive at its destination, it will go back to the queue; this ensures no message is ever lost. This is a huge selling point for us. IBM MQ does not handle huge volume very well, though. There are some limitations to the queues. If these limitations could be relaxed, it would be a better product for us. You have to license per application and installation, so scaling up can get very costly very quickly. Conclusion Apache Kafka is a cost-effective solution for high-volume, multi-source data collection. If you are in a high-growth trajectory and if total message accountability and tracking is not a huge issue for you, this solution may work well for you. IBM MQ is a licensed product and can be very expensive, it also does not scale easily, which can be very problematic. IBM MQ requires a definite skillset that not many people have, which can be an issue for some and it affects the fast responsive support of this solution.
GT
Lead Architect at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Sep 14, 2022
The choice depends on your use case.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
5%
Financial Services Firm
32%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise49
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise147
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What do you like most about Apache Kafka?
Apache Kafka is an open-source solution that can be used for messaging or event processing.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Kafka?
Its pricing is reasonable. It's not always about cost, but about meeting specific needs.
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...
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 do you like most about IBM MQ?
The feature I find most effective for ensuring message delivery without loss is the backup threshold. This feature allows for automatic retries of transactional messages within a specified threshold.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
WebSphere MQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Uber, Netflix, Activision, Spotify, Slack, Pinterest
Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Kafka vs. IBM MQ and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
880,490 professionals have used our research since 2012.