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

IBM MQ vs Software AG Apama comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

IBM MQ
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
170
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (1st), Message Queue (MQ) Software (1st), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (1st)
Software AG Apama
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
CEP (1st), Streaming Analytics (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

IBM MQ and Software AG Apama aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. IBM MQ is designed for Message Queue (MQ) Software and holds a mindshare of 27.1%, up 20.7% compared to last year.
Software AG Apama, on the other hand, focuses on CEP, holds 23.8% mindshare, down 24.0% since last year.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
CEP
 

Featured Reviews

Md Al-Amin - PeerSpot reviewer
Reliable and secure performance consistently enhances message transfer
IBM MQ is more reliable and secure than other software. There is a saying that for the last 30 years IBM MQ has never been hacked. It is more secure and reliable. Whenever the configuration is done, I do not have to touch it again. It works fine, it is stable, and its communication is to the point and accurate. All performance-related aspects are better. Performance-wise, it is scalable, and other features such as DR, DC, replication, and active passive mode are complex to configure, but it remains scalable. The pricing model for IBM MQ could be more flexible for clients.
SP
A tool to send out promotional notifications that need to improve areas, like deployment and maintenance
Software AG Apama should support offline scenarios as it may not always be possible to stay connected with the cloud. The solution should be deployed on an on-premises model, and it should be able to handle offline scenarios. If certain rules are set in Software AG Apama, then it should be able to execute them without being connected to an open internet source. With Software AG Apama, one may face challenges since it is difficult to find people with the right skill set to operate it. The solution also makes use of a proprietary programming language that is hard to trace in the market. It is better to go with the new options available in the market since Software AG Apama has become an old product. The ease of development and maintenance should be enhanced, but it is difficult due to the use of the proprietary programming language in the product.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Combined with IBM MQ, this product is our primary data store."
"We use our routing feature when the request is coming from the business application. The request goes to the distributive side and it is routed to the right claim instance."
"The solution is stable."
"Technical support is quite helpful."
"The message queue and the integration with any development platform/language, i.e., NET and Java, are the most valuable features."
"RabbitMQ and Kafka require more steps for setup than IBM MQ. Installation of the IBM product is very simple."
"IBM MQ is robust compared to other products in the market. It also gives you support from the IBM team."
"On a scale of 1-10, I rate IBM MQ a nine."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the ability that it provides its users to handle different kinds of rules."
 

Cons

"The issue is that they're using a very old clustering model."
"If they could come up with monitoring dashboards that would be good. We are using external monitoring tools, apart from our IBM MQ, to monitor IBM MQ. If we could get monitoring tools or dashboards to keep everything simple for the user to understand, that would be good."
"I would like to see message duplication included."
"IBM could revamp the interface. The API is huge, but some developers find it limiting because of the cost. They tend to wrap the API course into the JMS, which means they're missing out on some good features. They should work a little bit on the API exposure."
"I have used the support from IBM MQ. There is some room for improvement."
"They could integrate monitoring into the solution, a bit more than they do now. Currently, they have opened the REST API so you can get statistic and accounting information and details from MQ and build your own monitoring, if you want. IBM can improve the solution in this direction."
"the level of training as well as product marketing for this product are not that great. You rarely find a good training institute that provides training. Many of the architects in several organization are neither aware of the product nor interested in using it. IBM should provide good training on products like this."
"IBM MQ could improve by adding more protocols or APIs for a standard application, such as MuleSoft."
"The ease of development and maintenance should be enhanced, but it is difficult due to the use of the proprietary programming language in the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's a very expensive product."
"We have a special contract with IBM MQ that give us a certain price."
"Small-scale companies may not want to buy IBM MQ because of its high cost."
"IBM's licensing model seems more reasonable than some competitors. They charge based on usage, which is good."
"Pricing could be better, as with all IBM products. But their performance in production, along with security and scalability, will pay returns in the long run."
"IBM MQ appliance has pricing options, but they are costly."
"It's super expensive, so ask them if they can consolidate some other licensing costs. But, IBM is IBM, so I guess we'll pay for it."
"If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price a seven. The product is expensive."
"A commercial license is required to operate Software AG Apama."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
860,825 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
36%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
4%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What do you like most about Software AG Apama?
The most valuable feature of the solution is the ability that it provides its users to handle different kinds of rules.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Software AG Apama?
A commercial license is required to operate Software AG Apama.
What needs improvement with Software AG Apama?
Software AG Apama should support offline scenarios as it may not always be possible to stay connected with the cloud. The solution should be deployed on an on-premises model, and it should be able ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

WebSphere MQ
Progress Apama
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Okasan Online Securities
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Apache, Salesforce and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software. Updated: June 2025.
860,825 professionals have used our research since 2012.