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

Aurea CX Messenger vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 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 Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
12th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (3rd), Message Queue (MQ) Software (9th), SOA Governance (3rd), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (7th)
IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 0.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is 4.1%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

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…
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 Some of the clients of our organization are using an outdated version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker for which the vendor doesn't provide direct support anymore.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

"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."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"The solution offers excellent stability."
"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"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."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"Straightforward development and deployment."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"IBM WebSphere Message Broker is one of the best middleware solutions"
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"It's reliable for our day-to-day operations, ensuring fast and secure data integration across different systems."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."
 

Cons

"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"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."
"As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordingly."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"The product's features are not being upgraded or enhanced by the vendor"
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
 

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 price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."
"IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time."
"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 licensing cost of IBM WebSphere Message Broker needs to be reduced"
"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
858,435 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
6%
Financial Services Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
 

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 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

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom Mortgage
WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire
Find out what your peers are saying about Aurea CX Messenger vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
858,435 professionals have used our research since 2012.