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

Aurea CX Messenger vs IBM MQ comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Aurea CX Messenger
Ranking in Business Activity Monitoring
4th
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
11th
Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)
9th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (13th), SOA Governance (6th)
IBM MQ
Ranking in Business Activity Monitoring
1st
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
1st
Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
174
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 3.7%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM MQ is 21.3%, down from 25.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM MQ21.3%
Aurea CX Messenger3.7%
Other75.0%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Radhey Rajput - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. IT Analyst at NCR Corporation
Lightweight and efficient solution
It's very good and lightweight. But, it does not provide web service communication. But it is excellent for internal connections One valuable feature is the messaging broker. If there is a disruption, it restores the messages. And when the application is running, it delivers all the messages. The…
David Pizinger - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise Technical Leader at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"The solution offers excellent stability."
"Before this, there was a separate front-end software setup for different departments in the organization, which is now clubbed together and provides a single platform for all departments functioning on different business aspects."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."
"Sonic is lightweight, scalable, and does the work; easy to start, setup, and manage, and compared with Oracle much easier and cheaper."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"Easy to deploy new services."
"It doesn't lose transactions, it's fast, and it runs on every platform."
"The solution offers very good features, including listener channels, remote queues, and transmit queues."
"From a company's productivity perspective, we see a lot of benefits."
"I am very fond of IBM MQ because of the reliability and throughput part, at least on a single server."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"MQ is a very quiet product: It does what it's supposed to do, is very reliable and scalable, and when there is a problem it's usually because someone did something wrong or wrote something wrong, and once that gets corrected, it just keeps running day and night without missing a beat."
"IBM MQ is the right choice because of the stability and the performance. And from the support perspective, it's enough to have a really small team."
"The solution is fast with end data compared to other messaging tools."
 

Cons

"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"I would definitely like to see marketing for this product."
"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."
"They should not be frequently upgrading the product version."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"The 2015 version was a nightmare at the beginning compared with 2013 version."
"Technical support needs to be faster and more knowledgeable."
"A better user interface; right now, it's technician dependent, so it's a tech support role."
"What could be improved is the high-availability. The way MQ works is that it separates the high-availability from the workload balance. The scalability should be easier. If something happens so that the messages are not available on each node, scalability is only possible for the workload balance."
"Most of our customers are quite happy with the solution but they have an issue with the cost. They want to move to cheaper solutions."
"The monitoring could be improved. It's a pain to monitor the throughput through the MQ."
"The licensing fees should be more cost-effective so that we can better pitch the product to our clients. With the pricing as it is, they tend to move away from IBM products."
"I couldn't find a lot of information on the system API side."
"I don’t like legacy view of MQ."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."
"You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscription"
"The pricing is not so high."
"I think it's pretty reasonable, but I'm not so too sure of the current pricing strategy from IBM. We use many bundled services, and most often, we go through a service provided by some other third-party implementation. So, I can't really give an honest opinion about that."
"Licensing for this software is on a yearly basis. The standard fee includes the maintenance and updates that are released periodically."
"If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price a seven. The product is expensive."
"The problem with this product is that it's a little bit expensive."
"The price of the solution could be reduced, and we are on an annual subscription."
"99.999 percent availability for less than a penny per message over the past 25 years. IBM MQ is the cheapest software in the IBM software portfolio, and it is one of the best."
"Most of our customers are quite happy with the solution but they have an issue with the cost. They want to move to cheaper solutions."
"There is a different platform price between Windows, z/OS, and iSeries."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
20%
Construction Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Non Profit
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise147
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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...
 

Also Known As

CX Messenger Enterprise, Aurea Sonic ESB, Aurea Sonic, Aurea Sonic MQ
WebSphere MQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom Mortgage
Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Aurea CX Messenger vs. IBM MQ and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.