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

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
4th
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
12th
Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)
8th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (14th), 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 May 2026, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 3.5%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM MQ is 21.0%, down from 26.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM MQ21.0%
Aurea CX Messenger3.5%
Other75.5%
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…
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.

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."
"My advice to anyone considering Aurea CX Messenger is just try it; from my experience, it is very easy to deploy, very easy to develop and to implement in production."
"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."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"The solution's stability is excellent; it's one of the best features, and we haven't experienced any bugs or glitches that have affected its performance."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"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."
"Easy to deploy new services."
"We use it for all our integration cases, including the integration of core applications within our company and external solutions from our partners."
"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."
"It's a great product."
"From our perspective, we use the IBM suite; they provide great support when we need it, they are always evolving and are very stable, so all around it is a very good suite from IBM."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"We use MQ as part of the core of our enterprise information bus, allowing messaging to integrate with third-party solutions, like for web banking, so we are able to create an information highway that takes in legacy events, captures ATM and credit card transactions, and integrates that into a digital web dashboard."
"We had our MQ running in production for almost 800-900 days without any issues, i.e., for more than three years, we didn't even have to restart, and still everything runs so smoothly."
"The solution is fast with end data compared to other messaging tools."
 

Cons

"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."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"The 2015 version was a nightmare at the beginning compared with 2013 version."
"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."
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"I'm not aware of the pricing. That's something others deal with, but they do tell me that it is expensive."
"I'd like to see improvements around that area, so we can take our z/OS systems into our distributed environments even easier."
"You can always say price is an area with room for improvement."
"The integration capabilities could be even easier."
"Actually, I am looking to move to the cloud. We need to integrate the databases that are in the company and provide API integration services in the cloud."
"IBM MQ has limitations regarding scaling options. The licensing costs associated with scaling up and down were significant, which is why we are moving to Apache-based services such as Kafka."
"I would like the ability to connect with some of the more recent offerings, such as API Connect; being able to publish our MQ endpoints, the queues, the messaging infrastructure as IT assets."
"If it was a little bit more user friendly, or more gen-x friendly maybe, that would be the best benefit."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."
"The pricing is not so high."
"You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscription"
"We have a special contract with IBM MQ that give us a certain price."
"Small-scale companies may not want to buy IBM MQ because of its high cost."
"The license for IBM MQ is commercial and not cheap. You get a multi-platform solution, which is important because it lets you connect systems on mainframes, personal solutions, Unix, Linux, etc."
"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."
"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."
"To implement such an IBM solution, a company has to pay a lot in term of licensing and consultancy. A pricing model might be a better option."
"I rate the product price a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price a seven. The product is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Non Profit
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Marketing Services Firm
6%
 

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 Enterprise18
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: April 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.