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

IBM MQ vs TIBCO Rendezvous 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
Ranking in Business Activity Monitoring
1st
Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
170
Ranking in other categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software (1st)
TIBCO Rendezvous
Ranking in Business Activity Monitoring
4th
Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Business Activity Monitoring category, the mindshare of IBM MQ is 42.1%, up from 41.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO Rendezvous is 9.0%, up from 4.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Activity Monitoring
 

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.
MP
Good communication, stable, and responsive support
TIBCO Rendezvous has some difficulties to be deployed in a cloud environment. We use it typically in a bare-metal infrastructure. We can use a cluster of the nodes of the other companies. For example, we cannot deploy in the cloud infrastructure, but the companies cannot deploy TIBCO Rendezvous in a cloud environment without issues. It is very easy to start the TIBCO Rendezvous in the DMO infrastructure. The first time we deployed TIBCO Rendezvous, we used it to support individual transaction integration between the distributed and mainframe applications. We spent approximately five days deploying TIBCO Rendezvous in the companies in their application. It's very fast to implement and to use.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is very easy to work with."
"The solution is very stable."
"Technical support is quite helpful."
"This solution has improved and influenced the communication between different applications, then standardized that communication."
"The solution allows one to easily configure an IBM MQQueueManager."
"The methodology and the way in which the platform has been produced as a standard is most valuable. There are so many different versions of it now, but the actual basic functionality and the simplicity of it have made it far easier to be implemented in so many different instances. When I worked with the OS/2 or PS/2 machine environment, the messaging mechanisms were based upon IBM MQ. It is so versatile, which is the main reason that I'm a fan of it."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Integrates between distributed systems: For example, it can help integrate processing between mainframe, client-server, web-based applications by integrating the messages, supporting Service Oriented Architecture."
"TIBCO Rendezvous has a strategy to communicate in the network between the DMO of the product. They provide strategy through secure communication. They use the UDP protocol, but It's not a resilient protocol. They put another protocol to create a type of guarantee. It has a high level of communication between the DMO. This is the best capability the solution has."
 

Cons

"There are things within the actual product itself that can be improved, such as limitations on message length, size, etc. There is no standardized message length outside of IBM. Each of the implementations of the MQ series or support of that functionality varies between various suppliers, and because of that, it is very difficult to move from one to the other. We have IBM MQ, but we couldn't use it because the platform that was speaking to MQ didn't support the message length that was standard within IBM MQ. So, we had to use a different product to do exactly the same thing. So, perhaps, there could be more flexibility in the standards around the message queue. If we had been able to increase the message queue size within the IBM MQ implementation, we wouldn't have had to go over to another competing product because the system that was using MQ messaging required the ability to hold messages that were far larger than the IBM MQ standard. So, there could be a bit more flexibility in the structuring. It has as such nothing to do with the IBM implementation of MQ. It is just that the standard that is being put out onto the market doesn't actually stipulate those types of things."
"It could provide more monitoring tools and some improvement to the UI. I would also like to see more throughput in future versions."
"They need to add the ability to send full messages (header + payload) from the MQ Explorer program, not just the payload."
"IBM HQ's scalability isn't the best."
"While there is support for API, it's not like the modern API capabilities."
"It could always be more stable and secure."
"It would be great if the dashboard had additional features like a board design."
"IBM MQ's pricing is higher than its competitors'."
"TIBCO Rendezvous is currently restricted in a cloud environment and it would be more useful in a hybrid cloud setup. It does not work correctly in a cloud environment alone. This is something they can improve in the future."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM MQ appliance has pricing options, but they are costly."
"I think it's pretty reasonable, but I'm not so too sure of the current pricing strategy from IBM. We use many bundled services, and most often, we go through a service provided by some other third-party implementation. So, I can't really give an honest opinion about that."
"We have a special contract with IBM MQ that give us a certain price."
"Use the new and lightweight version (Liberty) to lower licensing costs. It is also easier to upgrade/maintain."
"IBM products, in general, have high licensing costs and support costs are too high."
"There is a different platform price between Windows, z/OS, and iSeries."
"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."
"It is a very expensive product compared to the open source products in the market."
"There is a license needed to use this solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Activity Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
37%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
4%
Financial Services Firm
60%
Computer Software Company
13%
Energy/Utilities Company
4%
University
3%
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

WebSphere MQ
Rendezvous
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Agilent Technologies, Vodafone Hutchison Australia
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM MQ vs. TIBCO Rendezvous and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.