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…
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

"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"Sonic is lightweight, scalable, and does the work; easy to start, setup, and manage, and compared with Oracle much easier and cheaper."
"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."
"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."
"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 offers excellent stability."
"The solution is fast with end data compared to other messaging tools."
"The most valuable feature is that it's a very strong integration platform but it is quite a monolithic solution. It's got everything."
"RabbitMQ and Kafka require more steps for setup than IBM MQ. Installation of the IBM product is very simple."
"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 most valuable feature is the stability. It's perfect in this way."
"The reason why we chose IBM was because of its stability and they've got the products that we are looking for."
"The benefits of the new version are greater ease of use and management of MQ."
"This product is from IBM which is a very well-known company, and MQ is a reliable, easy to understand and install solution."
 

Cons

"They should not be frequently upgrading the product version."
"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"
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"I would definitely like to see marketing for this product."
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"Another issue, which again, I'm not aware if they already have because we have not updated to the latest version, but all the DevOps features would be nice to have because right now they are using their own deployment features."
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"The solution should offer a freeware version, free vouchers, or certifications for learning purposes and building a knowledge base."
"With the previous versions, it was just that we were a version behind on what the version of Maximo and everything we were using, so it was causing a few little glitches and buggy issues."
"Scalability is not an issue of IBM MQ. There is no replication of messages and that is very bad for systems."
"IBM HQ's scalability isn't the best."
"The customer service or technical support from IBM is not as good as we expected; it could be better. They don't meet our standards due to the timing to get a person with knowledge."
"SonicMQ CAA (continuous availability architecture) functionality on auto failover and data persistence should be made available without a shared drive, as it exists in multi-instance queue managers."
"I would like to see message duplication included."
"The tool is expensive."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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"
"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."
"The solution costs are high, it is going to cost a fair bit for annual operating costs and support."
"Our costs haven't increased but they also have not improved."
"I think the pricing is reasonable, especially with IIB as a part of it."
"It is a licensed product. As compared to an open-source solution, such as RabbitMQ, it is obviously costly. If you're using IBM Message Broker, which is a licensed product, IBM MQ is included in the same license. You don't have to pay separately for IBM MQ. The license cost of IBM MQ is lesser than IBM Message Broker."
"I rate the product price a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"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."
"It is a very expensive product compared to the open source products in the market."
"IBM MQ is expensive and they charge based on the CPU."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
895,151 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
7%
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 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: April 2026.
895,151 professionals have used our research since 2012.