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

Apache Kafka vs IBM MQ vs MuleSoft Anypoint Platform 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.0
Apache Kafka offers substantial returns, especially in high-value applications, with enhanced data buffering, cost savings, and ease of use.
Sentiment score
7.1
IBM MQ offers cost-effective, reliable integration, enhancing efficiency, minimizing data loss, and achieving ROI within two years.
Sentiment score
7.2
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform reduces TCO, simplifies integration, and offers high ROI, 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
5.8
Apache Kafka's support is community-driven, with varying user experiences and enhanced options available through paid subscriptions and consultants.
Sentiment score
6.9
IBM MQ support is efficient yet inconsistent, with quick issue resolution but delays and documentation improvements needed for complex issues.
Sentiment score
6.8
Users praise MuleSoft's responsive support but suggest documentation and response time improvements; satisfaction varies with support levels.
The Apache community provides support for the open-source version.
There is plenty of community support available online.
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
7.8
Apache Kafka is praised for its robust scalability, efficiently handling high data throughput, with some challenges in cluster management.
Sentiment score
7.5
IBM MQ scales well across environments but may face challenges with configuration and hardware in certain scenarios.
Sentiment score
7.6
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform is highly flexible and scalable but faces challenges with file sizes and scaling costs.
Customers have not faced issues with user growth or data streaming needs.
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.
Performance-wise, it is scalable, and other features such as DR, DC, replication, and active passive mode are complex to configure, but it remains scalable.
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
7.7
Apache Kafka is stable and performs well with high data volumes, though some configurations may affect its reliability.
Sentiment score
8.1
IBM MQ is praised for stability, minimal downtime, and reliability, with strong performance and regular updates enhancing user satisfaction.
Sentiment score
7.9
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform shows improved stability, minimal issues, and high reliability with optimized resource management in cloud environments.
Apache Kafka is stable.
This feature of Apache Kafka has helped enhance our system stability when handling high volume data.
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.
 

Room For Improvement

Enhancing Kafka involves user-friendly UI, improved monitoring, reduced ZooKeeper dependency, better documentation, flexibility, and integration with other platforms.
IBM MQ users seek enhanced security, user interfaces, monitoring, cloud integration, graphical admin, mobile/web support, and cost-effective training.
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform needs enhancements in processing, support, integration, and user interface for improved efficiency and usability.
The performance angle is critical, and while it works in milliseconds, the goal is to move towards microseconds.
We are always trying to find the best configs, which is a challenge.
A more user-friendly interface and better management consoles with improved documentation could be beneficial.
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

Apache Kafka is free to use, but costs vary for managed services and enterprise solutions, potentially exceeding 100,000 euros annually.
IBM MQ's high cost is justified by performance and scalability, yet some prefer open-source alternatives for affordability.
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform's pricing is complex and high, potentially deterring smaller organizations despite offering enterprise support.
The open-source version of Apache Kafka results in minimal costs, mainly linked to accessing documentation and limited support.
Its pricing is reasonable.
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.
I am not exactly sure about the licensing cost compared to similar products, but I assume it is affordable since we continue to use it, and it is also used by our customers.
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

Apache Kafka excels in scalability, real-time streaming, and flexibility, ideal for large data volumes and event-driven architectures.
IBM MQ is valued for reliable data transfer, seamless integration, scalability, security, and ease of administration across industries.
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform excels with API management, integration features, a user-friendly interface, and robust data management capabilities.
Apache Kafka is effective when dealing with large volumes of data flowing at high speeds, requiring real-time processing.
It allows the use of data in motion, allowing data to propagate from one source to another while it is in motion.
The impact of Apache Kafka's scalability features on my organization and data processing capabilities depends on how many messages each company wants to receive.
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.
 

Mindshare comparison

Streaming Analytics
Message Queue (MQ) Software
Business-to-Business Middleware
 

Featured Reviews

Snehasish Das - PeerSpot reviewer
Data streaming transforms real-time data movement with impressive scalability
I worked with Apache Kafka for customers in the financial industry and OTT platforms. They use Kafka particularly for data streaming. Companies offering movie and entertainment as a service, similar to Netflix, use Kafka Apache Kafka offers unique data streaming. It allows the use of data in…
Md Al-Amin - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable and secure performance consistently enhances message transfer
IBM MQ is more reliable and secure than other software. There is a saying that for the last 30 years IBM MQ has never been hacked. It is more secure and reliable. Whenever the configuration is done, I do not have to touch it again. It works fine, it is stable, and its communication is to the point and accurate. All performance-related aspects are better. Performance-wise, it is scalable, and other features such as DR, DC, replication, and active passive mode are complex to configure, but it remains scalable. The pricing model for IBM MQ could be more flexible for clients.
Tolulope A. Adeniji - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides application integration and reduces time and effort during upgrades
One of the most valuable aspects was its impact on reducing time and effort during upgrades. Previously, SAP upgrades required significant coordination with multiple teams. Now, thanks to our streamlined integration approach, the SAP team interacts primarily with the integration team. When changes are needed, we simply create a new version. This allows application teams to migrate gradually from the old version to the new one, without extensive involvement from the SAP team. Moreover, our approach has improved reliability by eliminating duplicated efforts. Previously, different teams would often duplicate data sets due to inefficiencies in data naming conventions. We centralized data integration, ensuring that all applications use the same data set.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
37%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
4%
Computer Software Company
14%
Educational Organization
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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...
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" sol...
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, si...
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 al...
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 hybr...
How does TIBCO BusinessWorks compare with Mule Anypoint Platform?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether TIBCO BusinessWorks or Mule Anypoint platform integration ...
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 f...
 

Also Known As

No data available
WebSphere MQ
Data Integrator, Anypoint MQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Uber, Netflix, Activision, Spotify, Slack, Pinterest
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 Databricks, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft and others in Streaming Analytics. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.