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
7.3
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
12th
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 October 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Red Hat Fuse is 7.0%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus is 3.9%, up from 3.5% 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 Bus3.9%
Other89.1%
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

Kaushal Kedia - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers a single console for all applications and supports Camel routing
Containerization is one key area where the product can improve, but it probably has already improved in JBOS integration. On a few occasions, our company's production team faced an issue with Red Hat Fuse; the screen displayed that the containers had gone down while, in reality, they were running in the background. The user interface and the back-end code were not in sync in the aforementioned situation, which our organization frequently faced while using Red Hat Fuse. But at our company, we were using an older version of Red Hat Fuse in which we faced the issues. From the JBOS end, the product was very frequently changed from Red Hat, and it was difficult for our clients to keep investing money in every upgrade. Six or seven years back, Red Hat Fuse was one of the best solutions.
Mustofa Yonus - PeerSpot reviewer
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 solution has more tooling and options."
"More than a feature, I would say that the reliability of the platform is the most valuable aspect."
"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."
"We use it because it is easy to integrate with any other application...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution nine out of ten."
"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."
"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."
"Red Hat Fuse's best features are that it's very easy to set up and maintain."
"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."
"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 feature is that it is a service-oriented architecture, SOA-based."
"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."
"It's very stable and reliable."
 

Cons

"There is definitely a bit of a learning curve."
"The pricing model could be adjusted. The price should be lower."
"What needs to be improved in Red Hat Fuse is on the development side because when you use it for development purposes, it lacks a user interface compared to what MuleSoft has, so it's a bit difficult for users."
"Containerization is one key area where the product can improve"
"The documentation for Fuse can be improved because, while it is very detailed and extensive, it is not too intuitive for someone that has to deliver some kind of troubleshooting services. In particular, for installation, re-installation, or upgrades, I find that the documentation can be improved."
"In the next release, I'd like more stability and more security overall."
"The solution will be discontinued in 2024."
"The testing part, specifically when running it in the cloud, could be improved. It's a little bit complex, especially considering its cloud nature."
"The intermediate version that we are using has stability issues. These stability issues should be resolved, but it seems like TIBCO is not focusing on resolving these issues. The resolution timelines are quite high even for high-priority incidents. Its price should be lower. Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."
"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."
"We'd like to see improvements in product support."
"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."
"Issues with the support, the fees, and the termination of the professional services are reasons we are looking for other solutions."
"The initial setup process could be easier."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Red Hat Fuse saved us money. It is a lot easier to license for cloud deployments."
"The solution doesn't have independent licensing."
"We found other solutions were more costly."
"We use the standard license, but you need the container platform in order to run it."
"We are paying around $24 million across five years."
"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."
"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."
"The biggest issue disadvantage of TIBCO is that it is expensive."
"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 licensing cost is a challenge for quite a few customers."
"Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."
"Price-wise, I would say that the product is expensive."
"When it comes to cost, TIBCO is much more competitive than a product like Pega."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
872,778 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
16%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Red Hat Fuse?
Containerization is one key area where the product can improve, but it probably has already improved in JBOS integration. On a few occasions, our company's production team faced an issue with Red H...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Fuse?
Our company used Red Hat Fuse to integrate layers of numerous applications. The solution has also been used in our organization for orchestration purposes of multiple microservices over the years. ...
What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Fuse?
I would rate Red Hat Fuse as eight out of ten. When the solution was being used in our organization, the JBoss or Red Hat support was great. The solution was highly stable, robust, and scalable, an...
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: September 2025.
872,778 professionals have used our research since 2012.