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

Aurea CX Messenger vs IBM MQ comparison

 

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
3rd
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
9th
Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)
7th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (12th), SOA Governance (3rd)
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
6.9
Number of Reviews
170
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM MQ is 26.8%, up from 20.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Radhey Rajput - PeerSpot reviewer
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…
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"The solution offers excellent stability."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable features are the point to point messaging and the MQ API."
"IBM MQ deals mainly with the queuing mechanism. It passes the data and it publishes it. These two abilities are the most valuable features."
"We use queue managers/concentrators for message flow going upstream and downstream on applications with enterprise licenses."
"The solution is very easy to work with."
"I appreciate the level of control we have over queue managers, queues, and the messaging itself. That provides good security. So, the control and scalability of messaging are important to me."
"This solution has improved and influenced the communication between different applications, then standardized that communication."
"The most valuable feature of IBM MQ is transaction processing."
"On a scale of 1-10, I rate IBM MQ a nine."
 

Cons

"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"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."
"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."
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"I wanted to upgrade Windows Server. It's not that easy to move."
"I'm not sure that current version has event-driven mechanism requests that people go for. I would like the latest version to come with both type of event mechanisms: an email server and a POP server. If that is not there, then that would be a great addition."
"It could get a face lift with a modern marketing campaign."
"The worst part is the monitoring or admin, especially in the ACE or Broker. There is always a problem of transparency. In MQ you can observe any process and you know exactly what's going on behind the scenes, but with the ACE or Broker, it's a problem monitoring the HTTP inputs. It's like a black box."
"It needs a User Interface which is better than the aging MQ Explorer. The existing solution MQ Explorer is outdated."
"We need to have a better administration console and better monitoring features. Right now, they are not good and could be a lot better."
"The user interface should be enhanced to include more monitoring features and other metrics. The metrics should include not only those from the IBM MQ point of view but also CPU and memory utilization."
"You should be able to increase the message size. It should be dynamic. Each queue has a limitation of 5,000."
 

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."
"There is a different platform price between Windows, z/OS, and iSeries."
"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."
"Licensing for this software is on a yearly basis. The standard fee includes the maintenance and updates that are released periodically."
"IBM's licensing model seems more reasonable than some competitors. They charge based on usage, which is good."
"In terms of cost, IBM MQ is slightly on the higher side."
"There is real money involved here. As compared to RabbitMQ, IBM MQ is on the higher side in terms of cost."
"Small-scale companies may not want to buy IBM MQ because of its high cost."
"IBM is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Insurance Company
9%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
37%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Aurea CX Messenger?
The Messenger Broker is a really good feature.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Aurea CX Messenger?
The pricing is not so high. I will rate it a seven out of ten, where one is the lowest and ten is the highest. There are no additional fees to the standard license.
What needs improvement with Aurea CX Messenger?
The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services because the earlier version is not using web service and cloud functionality. If Aurea could include these features in the fut...
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...
 

Comparisons

 

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: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.