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

Red Hat Fuse vs TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 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

Red Hat Fuse
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Red Hat Fuse is 7.0%, down from 7.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus is 4.5%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Red Hat Fuse7.0%
TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus4.5%
Other88.5%
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

Luis Arce - PeerSpot reviewer
Technology Manager at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
Long-term integrations have improved performance and support critical business processes
The downsides of Red Hat Fuse that I encountered were related to the Java virtual machine I worked with, which was Oracle, as the client did not create good services. In the integration, they had many steps with a loop and several bad uses of the integration with many steps and a bad pattern of design. That was the problem, and then I resolved that. The user interface is not good, and it is a very technical tool. In comparison with other tools such as Oracle Integration Cloud or Oracle BPEL, Red Hat Fuse is more complex. However, the integration in low code is more simple because there is the possibility to create services directly in Java and call them at a high level from Apache Camel and expose them with Red Hat Fuse.
Mustofa Yonus - PeerSpot reviewer
Cheif Specialist- Licensing Systems at Roads & Transport Authority
A robust product that needs to improve the functionality it offers related to API lifecycle management
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a six to seven out of ten. My company consists of around 7000 employees, and we use the solution as an integrated service in around 300 to 400 systems, both internally and externally, making it a huge number. Our company uses the solution every minute and every second, and we can't function without it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing."
"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."
"The features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse are the OSB framework, containerization, and the integration of Apache technologies such as the NQ channel, CXF, etc. These are the features that are very prominent in the solution. Red Hat Fuse also offers flexibility, so it's another valuable characteristic of the solution."
"We usually had used PowerCenter for master data integration (by replication). But in some cases, it was better to use Fuse for providing the master data online. It doesn't make it necessary to replicate data."
"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."
"Because we have been doing Red Hat Fuse projects for three years, and over time we have matured, we can employ similar use cases and make use of accelerators or templates. It gives us an edge when we deliver these services or APIs quickly."
"More than a feature, I would say that the reliability of the platform is the most valuable aspect."
"The solution is stable. We have gone for months or years without any issue. There are no memory restarts, so from my point of view, it's very stable."
"The stability of this solution is excellent."
"The solution is very stable."
"It is easy to develop. It has a very wide range of features. The older versions are very stable, and there are no issues with the product."
"The GUI and IDE features of this solution are easy to work with and to develop. We find application management easy using this solution. It is a stable product"
"The most valuable features are the monitoring, ease of use, and easy to understand development GUI."
"The most attractive and beneficial feature is the ease of development."
"The technology is really easy to learn."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that the performance is robust."
 

Cons

"I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process."
"In the next release, I'd like more stability and more security overall."
"Containerization is one key area where the product can improve"
"The monitoring experience should be better."
"While it's a good platform, the pricing is a bit high."
"The solution will be discontinued in 2024."
"The stability of the solution is an area with a shortcoming that needs to be improved."
"The pricing model could be adjusted. The price should be lower."
"Our version does not have cloud capabilities."
"In the configuration, where we need to customize, it takes more time that we expect it to, ideally."
"The solution is very expensive when you use multiple components, it would b better if this could be reduced."
"Migration to cloud solutions or products should be made convenient, transparent, and easily understandable."
"If TIBCO could be able to sort the size of their base image in the Container edition, it would be really marvelous. Right now it's around 299 MB. We'd really want it to reduce to a few MBs."
"The stability of their latest version is not on par with their classic version 5.X."
"We'd like to see improvements in product support."
"The initial setup process could be easier."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In terms of pricing, Red Hat Fuse is a bit expensive because nowadays, if I'm just comparing it with OpenShift with Kubernetes, so Kubernetes and OpenShift, are similar, and Kubernetes is open source, so Red Hat Fuse is quite expensive in terms of support, but Red Hat Fuse provides value for money because it provides good support. If you want to get something, you need to pay for it."
"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."
"The most important feature of Fuse is the cost. It is open source and a cheap option for an ESB. So, most of the clients in the Middle East and Asian countries prefer this ESB. Other ESBs, like MuleSoft and IBM API Connect, are pretty expensive. Because it is open source, Red Hat Fuse is the cheapest solution, providing almost every integration capability."
"Red Hat Fuse saved us money. It is a lot easier to license for cloud deployments."
"The solution doesn't have independent licensing."
"You need to pay for the license. It's not free."
"Red Hat Fuse is an expensive tool, though I cannot answer how much it costs as that's confidential."
"We use the standard license, but you need the container platform in order to run it."
"Price-wise, I would say that the product is expensive."
"The licensing cost is a challenge for quite a few customers."
"The price is on the higher side. For the same price, if I go to the previous version, I would have got a lot more capacity with similar kinds of features."
"The biggest issue disadvantage of TIBCO is that it is expensive."
"When it comes to cost, TIBCO is much more competitive than a product like Pega."
"Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
15%
Retailer
9%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Red Hat Fuse?
I think the pricing for Red Hat Fuse is okay; it's not expensive, and the support is good.
What needs improvement with Red Hat Fuse?
The downsides of Red Hat Fuse that I encountered were related to the Java virtual machine I worked with, which was Oracle, as the client did not create good services. In the integration, they had m...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Fuse?
My use cases for Red Hat Fuse include using Drools to create a bunch of rules for the Finance Ministry in Chile many years ago. I worked with another enterprise named Aguas Andinas, which is a very...
What do you like most about TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus?
The most valuable feature of the solution is that the performance is robust.
What needs improvement with TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus?
I don't like the product's API management platform, as it doesn't offer users enough functionality to help with API lifecycle management, making it a product that is way behind its competitors. The...
 

Also Known As

Fuse ESB, FuseSource
ActiveMatrix Service Bus
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Avianca, American Product Distributors (APD), Kings College Hospital, AMD, CenturyLink, AECOM, E*TRADE
Colonial Life, CTBC Bank, New World Mobility, QUALCOMM, Swisscom Mobile, T-Mobile USA, Tata Teleservices, Telecom Italia
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat Fuse vs. TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.