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

Apache Web Server vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 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

Apache Web Server
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of Apache Web Server is 11.4%, up from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is 1.9%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Infrastructure Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Apache Web Server11.4%
IBM WebSphere Message Broker1.9%
Other86.7%
Application Infrastructure
 

Featured Reviews

Sakthivel Veeramuthu - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to optimize for high performance and handle heavy traffic
Most of the features I liked were related to the performance during peak hours. Because I needed to optimize the Apache web server to run it as a high performer during my customers' usage, then I needed to reduce my Apache web server resource usage for that. So that part of the thing is what I was more interested in doing. So, I mainly liked the performance and security.
BrajendraKumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers large-sized business information processing with a time-saving setup and impressive stability
I primarily use two previews of the product for Dev and two for QA as part of the production process. Whatever tools our company is using, the cost of a license in IBM WebSphere Message Broker is about 80% of all these software or tools. The message routing capabilities satisfy workflow efficiency. The product supports message formats of XML, JSON, and SSID, which are around 24 KB to 50 KB in size. The solution supports communication protocols like STTP and TCP. Features like DataGraph need to be introduced in IBM WebSphere Message Broker. Some of the clients of our organization are using an outdated version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker for which the vendor doesn't provide direct support anymore. For the aforementioned version, our company professionals can solve the queries on their own without seeking support from IBM. During the installation of a prior version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker, sometimes I have to configure the failovers through the cluster, where issues arise, and I often seek help from the support team. The solution is being used by some medicine companies in our organization that receive sales orders from the EDR or JDE. I would not recommend the product to others as its becoming obsolete and they can rather choose a middleware solution from Amazon or Azure. But I would overall rate the product a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Most of the features I liked were related to the performance during peak hours."
"The solution's most valuable feature is reporting."
"The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions."
"The solution offers good security."
"Its community is its most valuable feature. Solving problems is easier on Apache because so many people know this product."
"Apache Web Server can be used as a proxy server"
"Apache has proven to be incredibly reliable, and everything has operated smoothly without encountering any issues."
"It's reliable, configurable and generally secure."
"The solution has good integration."
"IBM WebSphere Message Broker is one of the best middleware solutions"
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
 

Cons

"So far, for us, everything is okay."
"There isn't a dedicated customer support available"
"The product's initial setup process could be easier for users."
"Adding a reverse proxy to Apache Web Server would be a significant improvement."
"Its stability could be better."
"It would be great if technical support for Apache were available in Iran. It is a very important need."
"The interface has room for improvement."
"The GUI for the less experienced users needs some improvement. For some companies, it is hard to configure it if they have not had any experience."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"The product's features are not being upgraded or enhanced by the vendor"
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."
"It is currently a weighty product."
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is no licensing cost for the product."
"It is an open-source solution."
"It is a free-of-cost solution."
"The apache software is free, open-source."
"The solution is expensive."
"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."
"IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time."
"The licensing cost of IBM WebSphere Message Broker needs to be reduced"
"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."
"This product is more expensive than competing products."
"I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."
"The solution is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
11%
Insurance Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Apache Web Server?
The product's initial setup phase is straightforward.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Web Server?
Apache Web Server is a free product, with no associated setup costs or licensing fees.
What needs improvement with Apache Web Server?
There is no need for substantial improvements as we have a dedicated team managing the server, ensuring everything runs smoothly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time.
What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
There could be greater flexibility and agility in service creation for the product. As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordi...
What is your primary use case for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?
We use the product for exposing services at the application level, integrating with various architectures like WebSphere, and handling static service creation.
 

Also Known As

Apache HTTP Server
WebSphere Message Broker
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, Intuit, General Electric, Adobe, VMware, PayPal, HP, EMC, eBay, Apple, SAP, Qualcomm, SanDisk, Allstate, FedEx
WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Web Server vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.