Mule ESB vs Red Hat Fuse vs WSO2 Enterprise Integrator comparison

"The solution doesn't require much code writing and we can develop APIs very easily."

"Writing your complex business logic as a simple workflow which can be understood by not so technical people, with hot deployment and a variety of free connectors, makes Mule ESB a powerful and accessible integration solution."

"We can do very fast development of the orchestrations of MuleSoft."

"The solution offers multiple deployment options."

"The cloud and integration abilities are most useful allowing us to use applications such as Salesforce and DataWeave."

"I'm not using ESB directly. It is the integration layer, so it's running under the hood. However, the conversion and transformation performance is excellent. Anypoint Enterprise Security is also solid."

"Everything runs in Java, which is a useful feature."

"Technical support is superb."

"The support training that comes with the product is amazing."

"It's very lightweight. There's no need for any specialized tools in order to deploy any service for Red Hat Fuse."

"Overall, it is a very, very good platform."

"One of the features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse is that it has a lot of containers so you won't have to worry about load balancing. In the past, there was a cut-off, but nowadays, Red Hat Fuse is moving off of that, so my team is utilizing it the most for load balancing, particularly running goal applications and three to five containers. There's automatic load balancing so you won't have to worry too much. I also found that component-wise, you don't have to do much coding in Red Hat Fuse because everything is configurable, for example, XML-based coding. Coding isn't that difficult. Performance-wise, I also found the solution to be quite good and its processing is quite fast. My team is processing a huge amount of data with the help of Red Hat Fuse."

"When comparing the database in Red Hat to that in Windows, we do prefer Red Hat based on its performance."

"It was pretty effective in aligning the software."

"The stability has been good."

"Regarding the efficiency gains from Red Hat Fuse's distributed development capabilities, when we flipped from the previous enterprise integration application to Red Hat Fuse, the TCO benefit was about 40 percent."

"It has improved our time management because development is quicker."

"It's a consolidated product; it works and it does its job pretty well."

"From the capabilities and functional possibility and anything else technical, it is a very well-done product, I have to say."

"The solution has two main parts: integration and transformation. It's very user-friendly and easy to understand for everyone."

"The solution basically conforms to our standards."

"I like the user-friendly system and development of the service-oriented architecture."

"The connectors have been the most impactful features for handling integrations. I can use these connectors when I need specific connectivity with a third party, like a core banking system in BFSI. I don't need to do all the development. I take the specific connector, put in the IP address and password, and it takes care of everything."

"The productivity is the most valuable feature; it is very easy to write remediations."

"We would like the ability to use our own code. This would allow us to develop customizations with ease."

"In respect of the UI or the interface, a concept such as that offered by Microgateway would be preferable."

"It would be great to see implementing security modules as a feature."

"We would like to have a built-in logging framework in which we can do auditing."

"Mule ESB could be more user-friendly. I think users must learn about the architecture before they start coding. The price could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an EDIFACT integration."

"There are some issues with both stability and scalability."

"The payment system needs improvement."

"Improvements could be made in performance."

"Some of the official Red Hat documentation could be improved a little bit. It was a little difficult to find exactly what I was looking for."

"There is definitely a bit of a learning curve."

"The initial setup can be complex, especially, if, like us, a company is trying to learn and understand the system."

"For improvement, they can consider the way we collaborate with other applications...Right now, in Red Hat Fuse, everything is not available under one umbrella."

"In the future, I would like to see more up-to-date documentation and examples from Red Hat Fuse."

"With respect to ROI, we have seen it but not as much as we expected. This is because the cost of the product is too high, in more than one sense."

"Our clients would like to see the user interface improved so that it is more user-friendly."

"In the next release, I'd like more stability and more security overall."

"You cannot include the validation of XPath."

"The integration capabilities need to be improved."

"The server is very specific and it is very difficult to get experience with it."

"The main issue with the product is pricing. It uses core-based pricing for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and API Manager. It would be best if you had APIM by default. It provides many connectors for easy integration with third-party systems."

"The configuration of the product is not an easy task for everyone."

"The micro integrator should be improved. There is room for enhancement considering alternative integration components."

"You cannot include the validation of XPath."

"The scalability is not strong. If you want to scale it you have to install multiple servers."

"This is expensive. In my next project, we had to go to other vendor."

"The various features and components for this solution are no longer free."

"The licensing is yearly, and there are additional fees for services."

"This product is cheaper than some offered by other vendors, although there is a problem because you have to pay for some third-party adapters."

"Plan your licensing model (cloud or on-premises or hybrid) that will allow seamless integration with new partners."

"Mule ESB is an expensive solution."

"I think the price is very high. If you use TIBCO BW, the license is for the CPU usage, then the IPS, and support. I also think the license for the product is a one-time expense."

"This product is expensive, but it does offer value for money."

"Red Hat Fuse is an expensive tool, though I cannot answer how much it costs as that's confidential."

"The solution doesn't have independent licensing."

"We found other solutions were more costly."

"Our license for Red Hat Fuse is around $27,000 per year, which is very expensive."

"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."

"Pricing has been something that we have been working with Red Hat on, year over year. We have preferred pricing with the university because we are involved in education and research."

"This is an expensive product. It costs a lot and although it's worth the money, the explanations that we need to give to our top executives are highly complicated."

"Red Hat Fuse saved us money. It is a lot easier to license for cloud deployments."

"The open-source, unsupported version is available free of charge."

"The solution costs about 20,000 or 30,000 euros per year, per instance."

"It is a low-cost solution."

"The pricing of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for enterprise subscriptions can be considered expensive, especially from the perspective of someone who prefers open-source software."

"I rate the product price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."

"The cost is better than IBM Cloud Pak."