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

IBM WebSphere Application Server vs Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 2025

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 WebSphere Application S...
Ranking in Application Server
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (3rd)
Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Ap...
Ranking in Application Server
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the Application Server category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Application Server is 10.5%, down from 11.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) is 15.1%, down from 18.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Server Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP)15.1%
IBM WebSphere Application Server10.5%
Other74.4%
Application Server
 

Featured Reviews

BharathirajaSukumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient load balancing and the clustering, achieved by using the deployment manager, is valuable
I believe that the system is already good. However, for improvement or enhancement, it is user-friendly, but it could offer better choices on the front end for different aspects or options. Sometimes, I have to search extensively for features, as there are no upfront tabs. There is a lack of visible, easy, user-friendly, and straightforward options for the number of features.
Srinadh  Puli - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation aids installation while management consolidation needs improvement
We are currently using Ansible for Jira installations and all the management tasks. We perform some tasks manually, however, Ansible helps in automating some of these processes I find JBoss to be lightweight and easier to manage compared to WebSphere. It allows for simple modification of…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I find IBM support to be very nice."
"High availability, alert management, and deployments are the most valuable features for us. We have the ND version so we can do deployments."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is easy to use."
"As compared to other applications, it has tremendous support. We have built internal capability so that we use it extensively internally. It is also easier to use with the outside data. You can write in ESQL, Java, or any other technology that you want to use for development. So, it is a lot more flexible in the language that it supports."
"It does integrate well with the Tivoli Federated Identity Management system."
"This solution is easy to use with a GUI that is intuitive and very helpful."
"The thing about WebSphere, as opposed to other ones that I am aware of such as JBoss and Liberty, is that WebSphere has the most comprehensive scaffolding available to it."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server is the ultimate product; there is nothing superior to IBM WebSphere Application Server, and while there are other options such as Tomcat, JBoss, and Oracle's solution, IBM WebSphere Application Server stands above them all."
"We use JBoss mainly for application deployments and application servers."
"There's good documentation and a pretty good community surrounding the product."
"The solution is easy to use."
"JBoss is more flexible and keeps up with modern technologies, supporting newer versions of different libraries."
"The stability is good. I would rate it a nine out of ten."
"I find JBoss to be lightweight and easier to manage compared to WebSphere."
"The greatest benefit of JBoss is that it was procured by IBM, thereby offering exceptional support for our banking operations."
"The solution has flexibility and stability."
 

Cons

"They should make the solution more lightweight and not bundle everything into a single product."
"When compared with WebLogic, Weblogic is lighter and consumes less memory."
"IBM WebSphere Application Server hasn't changed much. It's still a heavyweight for any company compared to what you get. Unless your code base is deeply linked with it, I don't think it's a great idea to go with this solution. The current trend is toward modularity and containerization, and given the product's requirements, containerization will be difficult. There is a memory requirement as well."
"While WebSphere mostly supports IBM HTTP Server (IHS) as the web server plugin, I think it would be beneficial if it also supported Apache and NGINX web servers. That would give customers more flexibility in their choices."
"The main issue we faced was its limited compatibility with non-Java technologies, which can result in difficulty detecting potential bugs and requiring additional integration efforts."
"It should be able to serve more concurrent requests like Oracle. Oracle has more powerful stability, availability, and real-time serving."
"Some things are very difficult to do, so the interface and usage could be more intuitive for those."
"WebSphere is very cumbersome and not user-friendly."
"JBoss is not as reliable and stable as WebLogic."
"It can have automation features. Everybody is focused right now on automation. In terms of saving cost, automation is always the first thing that comes to light."
"The solution sometimes crashed and had some compatibility issues with the DevOps JAR file."
"The documentation could be better. When we have questions, we need to check multiple websites. There isn't one place listing a set of common problems and how to fix them."
"The solution could improve by providing more integration."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The tool's documentation could be improved to explain its usage and functionalities clearly. Having accessible documentation would save time for leaders like me when juniors seek information about it. The documentation should be self-explanatory and guide users on how to utilize the tool."
"The product could be cheaper."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When you purchase Maximo, you get WebSphere for free."
"It costs more than some of the others, but, you get what you pay for."
"I don't remember the price, but there are no additional costs."
"If your application is just a web app that does not need to scale big, you can obtain a single core license of WAS Express edition, which has almost the same features with limited processing cores. If you manage a very big application farm (i.e. need to run 10 or more WAS servers) it is better to get IBM WAS Hypervisor Edition."
"We pay around $200,000 annually."
"WebSphere Application Server is expensive, so it may not be a good option for small companies."
"It's expensive."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"We pay for a maintenance license, but it is not expensive."
"The solution is cost-efficient compared to other products. Pricing is rated an eight out of ten."
"JBoss is an expensive solution."
"It is an open-source solution."
"I rate the product price as eight on a scale, where one means it is a very cheap solution, and ten points mean that it is a very expensive tool."
"There is no licensing cost. The solution is free to use."
"Since the solution is freeware, our customers don't need to pay any licensing fees."
"The pricing of JBoss is more reasonable than that of WebLogic."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Server solutions are best for your needs.
873,003 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
34%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
7%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
31%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise17
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM WebSphere Application Server?
Network Deployment is the most useful feature for scalability. It has many features within the standard WebSphere Application Server edition.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Application Server?
In Korea, when you buy IBM iOS, the WebSphere base version is included with iOS. That means no additional cost.
What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Application Server?
I find the server okay, however, using the Maker instance, the Moving instance, and the Change instance is a little bit complicated without WebSphere knowledge.
What do you like most about JBoss?
The product's initial setup phase is easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JBoss?
My advice is to carefully review the licensing options before setting up JBoss. While using the free version WildFly, most companies go for the paid Red Hat JBoss version, which comes with extra fe...
What needs improvement with JBoss?
JBoss can be improved significantly, especially regarding deployment overlays that need updates to apply quick fixes or environment-specific changes without redirecting the archive. Enhancements in...
 

Also Known As

WebSphere Application Server
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TalkTalk, Property management group, E.SUN Bank, Ohio National Financial Services, Aviarc, Cincom Systems, FJA-US, D+H, Staples, Michigan Municipal League
Tata Sky, Nissan, Swedish Board of Agriculture, Novamedia, American Product Distributors, Advanced Micro Devices, Emirates Group, E*TRADE
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Application Server vs. Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) and other solutions. Updated: November 2025.
873,003 professionals have used our research since 2012.