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 July 2025, in the Business Activity Monitoring category, the mindshare of IBM MQ is 39.7%, down from 41.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO Rendezvous is 9.8%, up from 4.7% 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

"What is quite useful is the asynchronous function which means we don't lose everything in the bank. Although we use a lot of things synchronously, asynch is the best thing so that no banking information is ever lost, even when the network goes down and comes up."
"The system integration is good."
"On a scale of 1-10, I rate IBM MQ a nine."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The solution can scale well."
"We have found the MQ messaging topologies valuable."
"The features of IBM MQ that have proven most effective for ensuring message delivery reliability are the stability of the system, the resilience and the product, which is definitely of top quality in this segment."
"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."
"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

"We would like to see the IBM technical support team extend their hand to providing support for other cloud vendors like Azure, Google Cloud, and AWS"
"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."
"Customer support response times could be improved."
"I would just like a more user-friendly experience to do common administration tasks. I know that you can use MQ Explorer, but having something that's already built in would definitely be useful."
"The product does not allow users to access data from API or external networks since it can only be used in a closed network, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The solution isn't free. There are other solutions, like RabbitMQ, which are open source and absolutely free to use. It's one reason we are moving away from IBM."
"The issue is that they're using a very old clustering model."
"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."
"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

"In terms of cost, IBM MQ is slightly on the higher side."
"IBM MQ is expensive and they charge based on the CPU."
"There is real money involved here. As compared to RabbitMQ, IBM MQ is on the higher side in terms of cost."
"It would be a 10 out of 10 if it wasn't so expensive."
"It's a very expensive product."
"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."
"The problem with this product is that it's a little bit expensive."
"If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price a seven. The product is expensive."
"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.
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%
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: July 2025.
860,825 professionals have used our research since 2012.