Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

IBM BPM vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM BPM and IBM WebSphere Message Broker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker report (Updated: September 2022).
633,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Some of the features that I like the most are team management and process performance. They are both very useful and very powerful with regard to the workflow.""The solution has helped us automate business processes.""IBM BPM is equipped with all the functionalities which are needed for building BPM enterprise-level applications.""The performance is fine.""Its workflow and integration with SAP are the most valuable features. It is also a stable solution.""The solution is stable.""IBM BPM is both scalable and stable.""The most valuable features are the integration capabilities - BPM can connect with almost any legacy or advanced system."

More IBM BPM Pros →

"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.""The solution has good integration.""Performance-wise, this solution is really good.""Straightforward development and deployment.""Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker Pros →

Cons
"IBM BPM's price could be improved.""There needs to be better documentation for IBM BPM in a central place. There is not any standard documentation for each component available and has been a barrier for developers.""I believe that if the license were cheaper, it would have a greater impact.""The price and the overall installation process could be improved.""We have had to use Mule as an alternative integration tool because it is more flexible than IBM BPM.""The front end is not customised for a good user experience.""They don't have a mechanism to achieve processes, data sources, and data.""The pricing is a little bit high. It's gone up in cost."

More IBM BPM Cons →

"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM.""The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight.""Technical support is good but they could have a better response time.""The installation configuration is quite difficult.""There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "Its price is on the higher side, and it can be improved. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. There are no additional costs."
  • "IBM could improve the price. It is far too expensive."
  • "I wish it was less expensive. I don't know why their pricing model is so high for a piece of software that could benefit so many. It just seems to me that they could have a lower cost, maybe with fewer features or whatever, but it should be possible to do a lower cost workflow software that uses the same interface and underlying engine but does not cost so much that you have to be a Fortune 50 company to buy it. It is annoying to me. There are a lot of solutions that IBM has that are really powerful but nobody can afford them. They know their business, but I still feel that there are a lot of customers who would benefit from this sort of thing. I don't know what this elitism is all about. I am sure they have people doing the money numbers, but it seems like you can make a lot more money by selling it to way more people for a little bit less."
  • "When considering the features of the solution the price is expensive compared to competitors."
  • "It's expensive. All software is always extremely high. The manufacturing cost that we have compared to the selling cost, it's not like you're building a house or building a car. But putting that aside, considering that it's expensive, it's a lot of money. If you compare it with some of the other alternatives in the market, it's a similar price. For instance, if you compare it with Pegasystems, it's a similar price."
  • "The price of the solution is fair for an enterprise solution that has both cloud and on-premise deployments and when comparing to competitors. Recently IBM has introduced Cloud Pak which allows for more flexible licensing options for automation and other features."
  • "Licensing is managed by the client, but we know it is yearly. Camunda is relatively cheaper. There is not much difference in pricing of IBM and PEGA. For large licensing, there are discounts as well."
  • "I already compared some solutions related to business process management, and I saw that the cost of IBM BPM is more expensive compared with that of Camunda, for example."
  • More IBM BPM Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "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."
  • More IBM WebSphere Message Broker Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
    633,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:We researched both IBM solutions and in the end, we chose Business Automation Workflow. IBM BPM has a good user interface and the BPM coach is a helpful tool. The API is very useful in providing… more »
    Top Answer:The solution has helped us automate business processes.
    Top Answer:In terms of licensing, we have to make it free for the developers so more people can install and use it. It is important to make at least licensing free to try in the cloud, not just for IBM BPM but… more »
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer:There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data.
    Ranking
    Views
    14,647
    Comparisons
    11,729
    Reviews
    28
    Average Words per Review
    503
    Rating
    7.6
    Views
    3,205
    Comparisons
    2,808
    Reviews
    5
    Average Words per Review
    502
    Rating
    7.2
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    WebSphere Lombardi Edition, IBM Business Process Manager, IBM WebSphere Process Server
    WebSphere Message Broker
    Learn More
    Overview
    IBM Business Process Manager is a comprehensive BPM platform giving you visibility and insight to manage business processes. It scales smoothly and easily from an initial project to a full enterprise-wide program harnesses complexity in a simple environment to better meet customer needs.
    WebSphere Message Broker is an enterprise service bus (ESB) providing connectivity and universal data transformation for service-oriented architecture (SOA) and non-SOA environments. It allows businesses of any size to eliminate point-to-point connections and batch processing regardless of platform, protocol or data format.
    Offer
    Learn more about IBM BPM
    Learn more about IBM WebSphere Message Broker
    Sample Customers
    Barclays, EmeriCon, Banca Popolare di Milano, CST Consulting, KeyBank, KPMG, Prolifics, Sandhata Technologies Ltd., State of Alaska, Humana S.A., Saperion, esciris, Banco Espirito Santo
    WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm55%
    Insurance Company14%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Real Estate/Law Firm5%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm23%
    Computer Software Company20%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Insurance Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company19%
    Financial Services Firm19%
    Comms Service Provider11%
    Insurance Company9%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business23%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise67%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise73%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise13%
    Large Enterprise71%
    Buyer's Guide
    IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker
    September 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker and other solutions. Updated: September 2022.
    633,952 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM BPM is ranked 1st in Application Infrastructure with 27 reviews while IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 7th in Application Infrastructure with 5 reviews. IBM BPM is rated 7.8, while IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of IBM BPM writes "A very stable and powerful tool for handling lots of concurrent users, but it is expensive, and the Eclipse-based tool has performance issues when you have a lot of developers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Message Broker writes "Easy to setup and deploy, with easy mapping, and it integrates well with MQ". IBM BPM is most compared with Camunda Platform, IBM Business Automation Workflow, Pega BPM, Appian and Apache Airflow, whereas IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, Mule ESB, IBM DataPower Gateway and IIS. See our IBM BPM vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker report.

    See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.

    We monitor all Application Infrastructure 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.