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

Red Hat Fuse vs WSO2 Enterprise Integrator 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
WSO2 Enterprise Integrator
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (32nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Red Hat Fuse is 6.9%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is 5.7%, up from 5.1% 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 Fuse6.9%
WSO2 Enterprise Integrator5.7%
Other87.4%
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.
Ritesh_Shah - PeerSpot reviewer
Decreases the development timeframe and costs
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. Often, customers decide to develop using open-source tools like Spring Boot if there aren't many connectors required to avoid increasing costs. They'll develop this way and then deploy using APIM, the bare minimum needed. It is mainly required for very complicated setups with many connectors. In the implementations I've seen, people often used open-source tools because there weren't many third-party systems involved—just their organization's own systems. From WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, I expect them to bring up more and more connectors in the future. That's the main expectation. Having more connectors in various areas will help us when discussing new requirements. I don't have any specific use case right now, so I can't name a particular connector. But, as new technologies emerge, the relevant connectors should be there for those. WSO2 Enterprise Integrator mainly helps with the integration part, which can be simplified only if you have relevant connectors for whatever you're doing.

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."
"The process workflow, where we can orchestrate and design the application by defining different routes, is really useful."
"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."
"This solution's adaptability to our use case has helped us integrate our systems seamlessly."
"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."
"We use it because it is easy to integrate with any other application...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution nine out of ten."
"I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. We are an enterprise business."
"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 productivity is the most valuable feature. It is very easy to write remediations."
"The installation process is easy."
"I like the user-friendly system and development of the service-oriented architecture."
"In my opinion, the most valuable aspect of this solution is its extensive range of adaptors and connectors. This feature holds significant importance and provides great value to users."
"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 stability is excellent."
"The solution basically conforms to our standards."
"The solution has two main parts: integration and transformation. It's very user-friendly and easy to understand for everyone."
 

Cons

"There is definitely a bit of a learning curve."
"While it's a good platform, the pricing is a bit high."
"The pricing model could be adjusted. The price should be lower."
"The stability of the solution is an area with a shortcoming that needs to be improved."
"The web tools need to be updated."
"I would like to see more up-to-date documentation and examples from Red Hat Fuse."
"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."
"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."
"The administration side is complex and could use significant improvements to enhance the solution's functionality."
"There are a lot of security settings that when you apply you have to re-apply again every time you modify a setting. It is something that really needs to be enhanced."
"The micro integrator should be improved. There is room for enhancement considering alternative integration components."
"In my opinion, the administration model and interface, of Carbon, are lacking in terms of its features and user experience."
"One of the reasons that we are looking for a replacement is their way of defining integration. The language of the XML structures that I use to describe the integrations are not that standard, and it's not easy to find people who are familiar with this approach."
"The server is very specific and it is very difficult to get experience with it."
"They should release upgrades more frequently."
"You cannot include the validation of XPath."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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 open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"Red Hat Fuse saved us money. It is a lot easier to license for cloud deployments."
"Red Hat Fuse is an expensive tool, though I cannot answer how much it costs as that's confidential."
"You need to pay for the license. It's not free."
"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."
"Our license for Red Hat Fuse is around $27,000 per year, which is very expensive."
"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 pricing of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for enterprise subscriptions can be considered expensive, especially from the perspective of someone who prefers open-source software."
"The solution costs about 20,000 or 30,000 euros per year, per instance."
"It is a low-cost solution."
"The cost is better than IBM Cloud Pak."
"The open-source, unsupported version is available free of charge."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

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 Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise11
 

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 WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
WSO2's analytics capability is good, considering the ELC support they provide.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
The product has reasonable and competitive pricing for enterprise customers. It is expensive for small businesses especially. They are using the open-source solution, and they find it expensive sin...
What needs improvement with WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
Something that could be improved in WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is that the problem is not a lack of capability or functionalities. The problem is that it is a very complex environment. To put your ...
 

Also Known As

Fuse ESB, FuseSource
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Avianca, American Product Distributors (APD), Kings College Hospital, AMD, CenturyLink, AECOM, E*TRADE
West
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat Fuse vs. WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and other solutions. Updated: November 2025.
873,085 professionals have used our research since 2012.