Aurea CX Messenger vs Mule ESB comparison

Aurea and Salesforce are both solutions in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category. Aurea is ranked #14, while Salesforce is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.0. Aurea holds a 1.0% mindshare in E, compared to Salesforce’s 18.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Aurea users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of Salesforce users who would recommend it.

Aurea CX Messenger

Read 7 Aurea CX Messenger reviews

831 Views
199 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Mule ESB

Read 52 Mule ESB reviews

4,072 Views
3,054 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Aurea CX Messenger

Mule ESB

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 2025

Mule ESB and Aurea CX Messenger are notable products competing in the integration platform sector. Mule ESB appears to have an advantage due to its flexibility, extensive connectors, and strong community support, enhancing its integration capabilities.

Features: Mule ESB offers robust integration flexibility with a wide array of connectors like Salesforce and SAP, efficient data transformation through DataWeave, and versatile deployment strategies. Its open-source nature supports varied integration methods and architectural styles, benefiting developers. Aurea CX Messenger excels in seamless development and deployment with tools like XSLT and JavaScript, ensuring ease for developers without tool-specific coding. Its scale-ready runtime environment supports traffic increase efficiently.

Room for Improvement: Mule ESB needs better documentation, improved stability, and enhanced exception handling support. Users seek more lightweight operations and easier setup processes. Aurea CX Messenger could benefit from cloud feature integration and alignment with modern API standards. Users also suggest less frequent version upgrades and more comprehensive documentation to enhance the user experience.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Mule ESB provides deployment flexibility with public, private, and hybrid cloud options, offering strong community support and responsive technical service. Aurea CX Messenger primarily supports on-premises environments and has consistent customer support, though users suggest improvements in responsiveness and expanded support options.

Pricing and ROI: Mule ESB includes a free Community Edition but involves high licensing costs, impacting ROI. Aurea CX Messenger is more cost-effective due to its subscription model that includes development environments, offering lower pricing compared to Mule ESB. These cost structures significantly influence perceived value and ROI optimization for both products.

To learn more, read our detailed Aurea CX Messenger vs. Mule ESB Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Aurea CX Messenger vs. Mule ESB

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 867,349 peers since 2012

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)

14th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business Activity Monitoring (4th), Message Queue (MQ) Software (12th), SOA Governance (4th), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (8th)

Mule ESB

Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

2nd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 1.0%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Mule ESB is 18.0%, down from 22.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Mule ESB	18.0%
Aurea CX Messenger	1.0%
Other	81.0%

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

Featured Reviews

Radhey Rajput

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…

Read full review

Maharsh-Kapadia

Enterprise Integration Architect at Tata Consultancy

Transforms enterprise integration with comprehensive platform and excellent support

The best features of this solution are that everything we get into a single platform, whether it's integration, API, or data modeling; everything is available in one platform. It's a hybrid, including cloud and on-premise solutions with good connectivity and good connectors. From the benefits of using Mule ESB, we could reduce the manual tasks to 50% in one to two years. The cost is still something we are trying to make lower because we see some advantages when we move from point-to-point integration to API-led connectivity. We have seen a lot of reusable assets, so the cost is reduced. Ultimately, we want to see how it's transformed into business revenue; that's what we are still looking into.

Read full review

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."

"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 offers excellent stability."

"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."

"The connectors help to connect with a variety of applications."

"The most valuable features of Mule ESB are its ease of use, documentation, ease to adapt to newer security and vulnerabilities, and a lot of help available. Additionally, there is a lot of flexibility, many patches available, and they provide APIs. They are a market standard."

"I'm not using ESB directly. It is the integration layer, so it's running under the hood. However, the conversion and transformation performance is excellent. Anypoint Enterprise Security is also solid."

"It was pretty fast to develop APIs on this platform, which is something I liked about it. So, the time to value was pretty good."

"The most valuable feature is the Salesforce integration."

"The most valuable feature is that it's programmer-friendly, so it's very easy to develop APIs."

"Easy connectivity and easy integration."

"The connectivity the solution provides is excellent. There are often too many systems that we have to integrate and this helps with that."

More Mule ESB pros

Cons

"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"

"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."

"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."

"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."

"The current version will not be supported for much longer."

"MuleSoft isn't as mature as some other integration technologies out there like IBM WebSphere. There's room for growth, and MuleSoft is working toward that."

"I would like to see support for BPM in the next release of this solution."

"We would like the ability to use our own code. This would allow us to develop customizations with ease. Additionally, it would be nice to have more analytics or insights on the exchanged information between databases."

"The initial setup is not easy."

"Improvements could be made in performance."

"From the product perspective, it was sometimes hard to manage the dependencies. When we had to add dependencies on a couple of different packages, it was sometimes confusing. It was hard to update them with Anypoint Studio, as well as with MuleSoft. There were challenges with that. So, that's one of the areas that could be improved."

"There's room for improvement in multi-file transfer functionality. It's not convenient when using MuleSoft, and it should have better capability for handling large amounts of data. For example, applications like GoAnywhere can handle huge chunks of data, so the tool should also have something to facilitate that aspect of integration."

More Mule ESB cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 pricing is not so high."

"Plan your licensing model (cloud or on-premises or hybrid) that will allow seamless integration with new partners."

"I think the price is very high. If you use TIBCO BW, the license is for the CPU usage, then the IPS, and support. I also think the license for the product is a one-time expense."

"The licensing is yearly, and there are additional fees for services."

"Regarding licensing and pricing, I find it somewhat flexible. They are more flexible with larger customers compared to small and medium ones, as their licensing model depends on ports and other factors. Large customers benefit from more flexibility in implementation and renewal compared to smaller ones."

"This is expensive. In my next project, we had to go to other vendor."

"The solution is expensive."

"You will not get any support from Mule ESB's team for the tool's community edition...You can get support with the licensed version of Mule ESB."

"This product is expensive, but it does offer value for money."

More Mule ESB pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

11%

Insurance Company

11%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Media Company

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	1
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	23
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	36

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Migration from IBM Integration Bus to Mulesoft ESB for a large enterprise tech services company

I was previously part of the Oracle SOA/OSB development team. In my current capacity I architected solutions using MuleSoft Anypoint Platform on cloud / on-premises and hybrid modes and on PCE/RTF ...

See all answers

IBM Integration Bus vs Mule ESB - which to choose?

Our team ran a comparison of IBM’s Integration Bus vs. Mule ESB in order to determine what sort of ESB software was the best fit for our organization. Ultimately we decided to choose IBM Integratio...

See all answers

What do you like most about Mule ESB?

The solution's drag-and-drop interface and data viewer helped us quite a lot.

See all answers

Comparisons

Oracle SOA Suite vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 29% of the time

TIBCO eFTL vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 29% of the time

ActiveMQ vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 25% of the time

IBM MQ vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 18% of the time

More Aurea CX Messenger Competitors

IBM Integration Bus vs Mule ESB

Compared 22% of the time

Oracle Service Bus vs Mule ESB

Compared 12% of the time

IBM B2B Integrator vs Mule ESB

Compared 9% of the time

webMethods.io vs Mule ESB

Compared 9% of the time

IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services vs Mule ESB

Compared 8% of the time

More Mule ESB Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Business Activity Monitoring

September 2025

Download Aurea CX Messenger product report

Buyer's Guide

Mule ESB

August 2025

Download Mule ESB product report

Also Known As

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

No data available

Overview

CX Messenger lets your technology keep pace with your business. Aurea’s industry leading Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) lets you adapt and change your infrastructure with plug-and-play speed and ease.

Aurea

For companies looking to modernize and unlock the value of existing on-premises systems and applications, an enterprise service bus (ESB) architecture serves as a critical foundation layer for SOA. When deployed as an ESB, the Mule runtime engine of Anypoint Platform combines the power of data and application integration across legacy systems and SaaS applications, with a seamless path to the other capabilities of Anypoint Platform and the full power of API-led connectivity.

Salesforce

Sample Customers

Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom Mortgage

Ube, PacificComp, University of Witwatersrand, Justice Systems, Camelot

Buyer's Guide

Aurea CX Messenger vs. Mule ESB

September 2025

Free Report: Aurea CX Messenger vs. Mule ESB

Find out what your peers are saying about Aurea CX Messenger vs. Mule ESB and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Aurea CX Messenger vs. Mule ESB report.

See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.

We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.