IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

IBM Integration Bus vs Red Hat Fuse comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
IBM Logo
12,535 views|7,941 comparisons
Red Hat Logo
5,695 views|3,492 comparisons
Featured Review
Buyer's Guide
IBM Integration Bus vs. Red Hat Fuse
July 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Integration Bus vs. Red Hat Fuse and other solutions. Updated: July 2022.
610,812 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The product is a user-customized tool so that you can adjust it to your specific needs pretty well with little trouble.""I found all features valuable. There are a lot of connectors.""The interface is quite stable.""It's easy to develop things, and it's easy to handle.""I recommend it for large enterprises but only for specific use cases. You need to have a relatively mature integration practice in your organization to leverage its capabilities fully.""IBM Integration Bus is flexible, easy to use, and easy to configure.""The biggest advantage of this solution is that it is very easy to learn, and very easy to build applications.""I use the integration of Kafka and the message flow, which is really good. It is also good for moving any file from one location to another. Using IBM Integration Bus in the data stage is pretty simple. You can see the preview and other things. The MQ server integrated with IBM Integration Bus is really great. I don't have to do a lot of configuration from that side. It is really good."

More IBM Integration Bus Pros →

"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive.""This solution's adaptability to our use case has helped us integrate our systems seamlessly.""One of the features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse is that it has a lot of containers so you won't have to worry about load balancing. In the past, there was a cut-off, but nowadays, Red Hat Fuse is moving off of that, so my team is utilizing it the most for load balancing, particularly running goal applications and three to five containers. There's automatic load balancing so you won't have to worry too much. I also found that component-wise, you don't have to do much coding in Red Hat Fuse because everything is configurable, for example, XML-based coding. Coding isn't that difficult. Performance-wise, I also found the solution to be quite good and its processing is quite fast. My team is processing a huge amount of data with the help of Red Hat Fuse.""We usually had used PowerCenter for master data integration (by replication). But in some cases, it was better to use Fuse for providing the master data online. It doesn't make it necessary to replicate data.""The support training that comes with the product is amazing.""Because we have been doing Red Hat Fuse projects for three years, and over time we have matured, we can employ similar use cases and make use of accelerators or templates. It gives us an edge when we deliver these services or APIs quickly.""The most valuable feature is the software development environment.""The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing."

More Red Hat Fuse Pros →

Cons
"We have come across many customer complaints about the excessive time it takes for IBM to provide customer and technical support.""Storage capacity of the product should be addressed.""I would rate the support from IBM Integration Bus a seven out of ten. They are very helpful but sometimes it takes too long for them to respond.""The solution could improve by having built-in implementation and secure monitoring without the need for API Connect.""IBM Integration Bus could be easier to manage, but this is true of all vendors. It doesn't always do what it says on the box.""I think security should be more simplified.""Its licensing or subscription model should be improved for more flexible adoption. There should also be more ease of use.""The next versions are moving toward container use. It would be a shame to make the product highly complex just to support one pattern of deployment. It is my hope that IBM continues to focus on practical functionality that is simple and cost-effective."

More IBM Integration Bus Cons →

"I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process.""As its learning curve is quite steep, developer dependency will always be there in the case of a Red Hat Fuse development. This should be improved for developers. There should be some built-in connectors so the grind of the developer can be reduced.""Red Hat is not easy to learn. You can learn it but you sometimes need external expertise to implement solutions.""Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible.""What could be improved in Red Hat Fuse is the deployment process because it's still very heavy. It's containerized, but now with Spring Boot and other microservices-related containers, deployment is still very heavy. Red Hat Fuse still has room for improvement in terms of becoming more containerized and more oriented.""What needs to be improved in Red Hat Fuse is on the development side because when you use it for development purposes, it lacks a user interface compared to what MuleSoft has, so it's a bit difficult for users.""The documentation for Fuse can be improved because, while it is very detailed and extensive, it is not too intuitive for someone that has to deliver some kind of troubleshooting services. In particular, for installation, re-installation, or upgrades, I find that the documentation can be improved.""My company doesn't have any experience with other messaging tools, so it's difficult to mention what areas could be improved in Red Hat Fuse, but it could be pricing because I find it expensive."

More Red Hat Fuse Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The price of this product could be lower."
  • "The solution requires a license and is very expensive here in India."
  • "The pricing could be improved to make it more competitive."
  • "The price of the license could be cheaper."
  • "The maintenance and support of the product are very expensive."
  • "IBM Integration Bus itself is prices fair but App-Connect is a bit expensive which we use in conjunction with it."
  • "IBM provides a quite complicated licensing model."
  • "I generally do not get involved in the licensing or pricing because I'm a hardcore technical guy, but I'm aware of the fact that IBM is highly expensive, so not everybody can afford it. All the products are licensed."
  • More IBM Integration Bus Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
  • "After doing some Googling and comparisons, the main standouts were MuleSoft and Red Hat Fuse. One of the big factors in our decision to go with Fuse was the licensing cost. It was cheaper to go with Fuse."
  • "Pricing has been something that we have been working with Red Hat on, year over year. We have preferred pricing with the university because we are involved in education and research."
  • "This is an expensive product. It costs a lot and although it's worth the money, the explanations that we need to give to our top executives are highly complicated."
  • "The most important feature of Fuse is the cost. It is open source and a cheap option for an ESB. So, most of the clients in the Middle East and Asian countries prefer this ESB. Other ESBs, like MuleSoft and IBM API Connect, are pretty expensive. Because it is open source, Red Hat Fuse is the cheapest solution, providing almost every integration capability."
  • "My company pays for the license of Red Hat Fuse yearly. At the end of the day, it's a low-cost solution, and its support licenses are still very decently priced versus bigger operators such as IBM, etc. Red Hat Fuse is much more affordable than other solutions. On a scale of one to five, with one being cheap and five being extremely expensive, I'm rating its pricing a one."
  • "Red Hat Fuse is an expensive tool, though I cannot answer how much it costs as that's confidential."
  • "In terms of pricing, Red Hat Fuse is a bit expensive because nowadays, if I'm just comparing it with OpenShift with Kubernetes, so Kubernetes and OpenShift, are similar, and Kubernetes is open source, so Red Hat Fuse is quite expensive in terms of support, but Red Hat Fuse provides value for money because it provides good support. If you want to get something, you need to pay for it."
  • More Red Hat Fuse Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) solutions are best for your needs.
    610,812 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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 on… more »
    Top Answer: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 Integration… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable features of the IBM Integration Bus are the flexibility to easily integrate with other solutions, such as SAP or any other vendors.
    Top Answer:The features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse are the OSB framework, containerization, and the integration of Apache technologies such as the NQ channel, CXF, etc. These are the features that are… more »
    Top Answer:My company pays for the license of Red Hat Fuse yearly. At the end of the day, it's a low-cost solution, and its support licenses are still very decently priced versus bigger operators such as IBM… more »
    Top Answer:What could be improved in Red Hat Fuse is the deployment process because it's still very heavy. It's containerized, but now with Spring Boot and other microservices-related containers, deployment is… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    12,535
    Comparisons
    7,941
    Reviews
    33
    Average Words per Review
    489
    Rating
    7.7
    Views
    5,695
    Comparisons
    3,492
    Reviews
    12
    Average Words per Review
    1,143
    Rating
    7.9
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    IBM WebSphere ESB
    Fuse ESB, FuseSource
    Learn More
    Overview
    IBM Integration Bus is an enterprise integration engine that offers a fast, simple way for systems and applications to communicate with each other. As a result, it can help you achieve business value, reduce IT complexity and save money.

    Red Hat JBoss Fuse is a lightweight, flexible integration platform that enables rapid integration across the extended enterprise - on-premise or in the cloud. JBoss Fuse includes modular integration capabilities, an enterprise service bus (ESB), to unlock information.

    Offer
    Learn more about IBM Integration Bus
    Learn more about Red Hat Fuse
    Sample Customers
    Salesbox, €sterreichische Bundesbahnen (€BB), Road Buddy, Swiss Federal Railways, Electricity Supply Board, The Hartree Centre, ESB Networks
    Avianca, American Product Distributors (APD), Kings College Hospital, AMD, CenturyLink, AECOM, E*TRADE
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm50%
    Computer Software Company24%
    Government6%
    Comms Service Provider6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company28%
    Comms Service Provider14%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Insurance Company7%
    REVIEWERS
    Comms Service Provider20%
    Financial Services Firm20%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Computer Software Company10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company33%
    Comms Service Provider20%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Government5%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise19%
    Large Enterprise61%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise72%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise29%
    Large Enterprise59%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business15%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise67%
    Buyer's Guide
    IBM Integration Bus vs. Red Hat Fuse
    July 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Integration Bus vs. Red Hat Fuse and other solutions. Updated: July 2022.
    610,812 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM Integration Bus is ranked 3rd in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) with 33 reviews while Red Hat Fuse is ranked 5th in ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) with 12 reviews. IBM Integration Bus is rated 7.6, while Red Hat Fuse is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Integration Bus writes "Good integration capabilities with an easy-to-learn language but is very expensive". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Fuse writes "Reliable, good support, saves time and reduces data entry errors". IBM Integration Bus is most compared with Mule ESB, IBM WebSphere Message Broker, IBM DataPower Gateway, Oracle Service Bus and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus, whereas Red Hat Fuse is most compared with Mule ESB, Oracle Service Bus, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, webMethods Integration Server and TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus. See our IBM Integration Bus vs. Red Hat Fuse report.

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

    We monitor all ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) 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.