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
3rd
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 September 2025, in the Business Activity Monitoring category, the mindshare of IBM MQ is 29.7%, down from 41.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO Rendezvous is 9.3%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Activity Monitoring Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM MQ29.7%
TIBCO Rendezvous9.3%
Other61.0%
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 thing that I like about MQ most is its reliability. It's one of those types of products that just works. You don't have to tinker around with it too much."
"I would rate the solution ten out of ten because I have been working on it for the past fifteen years."
"It's highly scalable. It provides various ways to establish high availability and workloads. E.g., you can spread workloads inside of your clusters."
"Setting up MQ is easy. We had a "grow as you go" implementation strategy. We started with a single channel and progressed to multiple queues and channels depending on the systems and integrations with other systems. It was a gradual deployment and expansion as we grew the services interacting with the core system using MQ."
"The usability of the solution is very good."
"Clustering is one of its most valuable features."
"This solution has improved and influenced the communication between different applications, then standardized that communication."
"The system integration is good."
"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 no improvements needed at this time."
"Should have more integration in the monitoring tools."
"The customer service or technical support from IBM is not as good as we expected; it could be better. They don't meet our standards due to the timing to get a person with knowledge."
"We have had scalability issues with some projects in the past."
"With IBM products, there's less marketing. If they do more demos and more seminars on their products, it will be very useful. On a given day. I get seminar invites for many vendors and products, but for IBM, I may get an invite once or twice a year."
"They probably need to virtualize the MQ flow and allow us to design the MQ flow using the UI. It would also help to migrate to the cloud easily and implement AWS Lambda functions with minimum coding. If you have to code, then just with NodeJS or Java."
"I wanted to upgrade Windows Server. It's not that easy to move."
"The user interface should be enhanced to include more monitoring features and other metrics. The metrics should include not only those from the IBM MQ point of view but also CPU and memory utilization."
"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

"The fee for this solution is on the higher end of the scale."
"This solution requires a license and we have purchased an enterprise license."
"It would be a 10 out of 10 if it wasn't so expensive."
"I think IBM needs to look at its pricing. The prices of IBM products should be simple. The old way of pricing should now be moving on to the cloud to be pay as you go, a plan-based kind of pricing."
"Our costs haven't increased but they also have not improved."
"To implement such an IBM solution, a company has to pay a lot in term of licensing and consultancy. A pricing model might be a better option."
"Use the new and lightweight version (Liberty) to lower licensing costs. It is also easier to upgrade/maintain."
"There is real money involved here. As compared to RabbitMQ, IBM MQ is on the higher side in terms of cost."
"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.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
36%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
4%
Financial Services Firm
63%
Computer Software Company
9%
Energy/Utilities Company
4%
Pharma/Biotech Company
3%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise144
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
 

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: September 2025.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.