IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs IIS comparison

IBM and Microsoft are both solutions in the Application Infrastructure category. IBM is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.0, while Microsoft is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.2. IBM holds a 1.9% mindshare in AIS, compared to Microsoft’s 11.1% mindshare. Additionally, 84% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of Microsoft users who would recommend it.

IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Read 13 IBM WebSphere Message Broker reviews

980 Views
284 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

IIS

Read 57 IIS reviews

3,221 Views
2,061 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

IBM WebSphere Message Broker

IIS

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 2025

IBM WebSphere Message Broker and IIS compete in enterprise technology infrastructure, with WebSphere excelling in integration and IIS in web server management. WebSphere holds an advantage in complex integration scenarios, whereas IIS is favored for web hosting efficiency and ease of use.

Features: IBM WebSphere Message Broker facilitates extensive enterprise integration with support for various messaging protocols and IT environments. It offers robust capabilities for complex system connectivity and transformation processes. IIS provides comprehensive web server management, integrating seamlessly with Windows applications. Its user-friendly interface and efficient resource management make it ideal for web-centric deployments.

Room for Improvement: IBM WebSphere Message Broker could improve its initial setup process, offering simpler onboarding for new users. Its pricing model might deter smaller enterprises. Enhanced user interface for streamlined operations would also be beneficial. IIS could strengthen its integration capabilities beyond Microsoft products. Security enhancements could further bolster its reliability. Offering more detailed documentation for advanced configurations would aid less experienced users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IIS offers a streamlined deployment process within the Windows ecosystem, making it highly accessible. Microsoft provides well-established support due to the product's widespread use. IBM WebSphere Message Broker involves a more complex setup but offers specialized support for its intricate deployments, ensuring comprehensive guidance for users.

Pricing and ROI: IBM WebSphere Message Broker involves higher initial costs, reflecting its advanced integration capabilities, offering substantial ROI for enterprises with extensive connectivity needs. In contrast, IIS provides a cost-effective solution for efficient web hosting, ensuring quick ROI for businesses prioritizing straightforward web solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. IIS Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. IIS

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,164 peers since 2012

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 Message Broker

Ranking in Application Infrastructure

16th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (8th)

IIS

Ranking in Application Infrastructure

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Server (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is 1.9%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IIS is 11.1%, down from 12.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Infrastructure

Featured Reviews

BrajendraKumar

Technical Architect at HCL Technologies

Offers large-sized business information processing with a time-saving setup and impressive stability

I primarily use two previews of the product for Dev and two for QA as part of the production process. Whatever tools our company is using, the cost of a license in IBM WebSphere Message Broker is about 80% of all these software or tools. The message routing capabilities satisfy workflow efficiency. The product supports message formats of XML, JSON, and SSID, which are around 24 KB to 50 KB in size. The solution supports communication protocols like STTP and TCP. Features like DataGraph need to be introduced in IBM WebSphere Message Broker. Some of the clients of our organization are using an outdated version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker for which the vendor doesn't provide direct support anymore. For the aforementioned version, our company professionals can solve the queries on their own without seeking support from IBM. During the installation of a prior version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker, sometimes I have to configure the failovers through the cluster, where issues arise, and I often seek help from the support team. The solution is being used by some medicine companies in our organization that receive sales orders from the EDR or JDE. I would not recommend the product to others as its becoming obsolete and they can rather choose a middleware solution from Amazon or Azure. But I would overall rate the product a nine out of ten.

Read full review

VikramSingh6

Operations Executive at Quess

A simple and easy-to-use solution but not recommended for public apps

I would rate the overall solution a six out of ten. We have around five to six developers and engineers for the solution’s deployment and maintenance. You can use the solution if your website is not too big or complicated. However, if it is big and complicated, then you need to use Apache or Red Hat. This tool can be used for internal purposes. But if you plan to host a public app, then I wouldn’t recommend the tool.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."

"The solution has good integration."

"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."

"It's reliable for our day-to-day operations, ensuring fast and secure data integration across different systems."

"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."

"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."

"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."

"IBM WebSphere Message Broker is one of the best middleware solutions"

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker pros

"The most valuable feature of IIS is that it's free, and it works."

"It's good and offers good usability."

"The product is stable."

"The solution has been reliable."

"The tool is very easy to use and efficient."

"The solution is easy to use."

"The product is flexible."

"The solution is very stable. The solution is very simple and easy to use."

More IIS pros

Cons

"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."

"The product's features are not being upgraded or enhanced by the vendor"

"The solution can add container engines such as docker."

"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."

"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."

"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."

"It is currently a weighty product."

"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker cons

"We've never had any issues with the solution, but it's still nice to have overall improvements on it. It could be easier and faster to use, for example."

"The only issue I've encountered is with certificates not working fine sometimes."

"Finding different settings can be difficult if you don't know where to look."

"Having no support for other than a Microsoft environment and programming languages limits the usage of IIS in many cases."

"The initial setup could be made easier."

"The price of the solution could be less to improve."

"The solution's black box is not fast."

"We'd like future versions to be more stable."

More IIS cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time."

"The licensing cost of IBM WebSphere Message Broker needs to be reduced"

"I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."

"The solution is expensive."

"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."

"This product is more expensive than competing products."

"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."

"The yearly licensing cost is very high. The solution is very expensive."

"The solution’s pricing is yearly. The pricing is affordable and not high."

"IIS comes along with an OS license from Microsoft. Others can opt for a perpetual-based licensing model to be able to use the system."

"The tool is included with Windows."

"The cost for IIS is already included in Windows services. We don't have to pay anything extra."

"There is a license needed for the solution."

"They offer a one-time payment model for the product license, and we pay annually for support."

"This solution comes included with Windows Server."

More IIS pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

21%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?

IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM WebSphere Message Broker?

There could be greater flexibility and agility in service creation for the product. As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordi...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for IBM WebSphere Message Broker?

We use the product for exposing services at the application level, integrating with various architectures like WebSphere, and handling static service creation.

See all answers

Which is better - IIS or NGINX Plus?

IIS is a flexible, secure, and manageable web server to host anything on the web. IIS’s scalable and open architecture can handle the most demanding tasks. From media streaming to web applications,...

See all answers

What do you like most about IIS?

The product is flexible.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IIS?

If you have a Windows license, there is no additional cost for IIS. However, you may need to pay for SSL publishing at times.

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM Integration Bus vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 50% of the time

webMethods.io vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 17% of the time

IBM DataPower Gateway vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 12% of the time

IBM BPM vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 11% of the time

Mule ESB vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker

Compared 10% of the time

More IBM WebSphere Message Broker Competitors

Apache Web Server vs IIS

Compared 28% of the time

NGINX Plus vs IIS

Compared 27% of the time

Tomcat vs IIS

Compared 11% of the time

Oracle WebLogic Server vs IIS

Compared 11% of the time

Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (EAP) vs IIS

Compared 6% of the time

More IIS Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere Message Broker

August 2025

Download IBM WebSphere Message Broker product report

Buyer's Guide

IIS

August 2025

Download IIS product report

Also Known As

WebSphere Message Broker

Windows Server IIS

Overview

WebSphere Message Broker is an enterprise service bus (ESB) providing connectivity and universal data transformation for service-oriented architecture (SOA) and non-SOA environments. It allows businesses of any size to eliminate point-to-point connections and batch processing regardless of platform, protocol or data format.

IBM

Internet Information Services (IIS) provides a secure, easy-to-manage, modular and extensible platform for reliably hosting websites, services and applications. With IIS, you get choice and control without giving up reliability or security.

Microsoft

Sample Customers

WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire

Erste Bank Group, NJVC, Samsung Electronics, Sheraton Hotels and Resorts, Tata Steel Europe, Urban Software Institute

Buyer's Guide

IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. IIS

July 2025

Free Report: IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. IIS

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. IIS and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. IIS report.

See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.

We monitor all Application Infrastructure reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.