The product does not allow users to access data from API or external networks since it can only be used in a closed network, making it an area where improvements are required.
Director at Absys
A product that offers good scalability to support business growth
Pros and Cons
- "Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
- "The product does not allow users to access data from API or external networks since it can only be used in a closed network, making it an area where improvements are required."
What needs improvement?
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using IBM MQ for fourteen years. My company is a customer of the product. I don't remember the version of the solution.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
Around 15 to 20 people in my company use the solution.
The product is used whenever there is a need to use it in the development phase. Once the tool is deployed on a particular site, we don't need to use the product until and unless any issues or errors are reported.
Buyer's Guide
IBM MQ
October 2025

Learn what your peers think about IBM MQ. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2025.
871,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.
How are customer service and support?
I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Before IBM MQ, my company used to use normal point-to-point APIs. My company started to use IBM MQ because we wanted to introduce standardization in our processes.
How was the initial setup?
The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I rate the product price a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price.
What other advice do I have?
IBM MQ streamlined our company's application-to-application communication since it is a rigid and robust solution that allows you to transfer data from one system to another system using the tool's adapters. In general, the product is very robust.
A scenario where IBM MQ reliability was critical for our company's operations includes an incident involving three to four of our clients who use the product, among which a few are airports situated in regions like Delhi and Bangalore in India. All the big airports use IBM MQ as an integration platform, so it is considered a tier-one application. In the aforementioned areas, there is a need for a tool that offers scalability and robustness.
The feature of IBM MQ, which I found to be most instrumental for our messaging needs, stems from the fact that my company never lost messages when we were using the product. The product has a queue manager, and the message doesn't go anywhere until and unless you read it. The best part of the product is that it ensures that there is no data loss.
IBM MQ's security features have enhanced the data transmission process in our company since it functions in a very secure manner. Nobody can get unauthorized access to the product.
The product offers very good scalability to support business growth.
IBM MQ's integration capabilities with other systems are beneficial since we have developed many interfaces for many airports. Many systems use IBM MQ to send data from one system to another, so it has helped in a great way when it comes to the integration part.
I rate the overall tool an eight to nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.

Senior Developer at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
I like MQ's simplicity and solid stability
Pros and Cons
- "I like the MQ's simplicity and rock-solid stability. I've never experienced a failure in two decades caused by the product itself. It has only failed due to human error."
- "IBM could revamp the interface. The API is huge, but some developers find it limiting because of the cost. They tend to wrap the API course into the JMS, which means they're missing out on some good features. They should work a little bit on the API exposure."
What is our primary use case?
I work for a company that has an ESB backbone built on the MQ. It's the enterprise bus for the whole company. I was a trainer for IBM products long ago, but I moved to different companies and now I'm a senior developer supporting MQ and IBM.
What is most valuable?
I like the MQ's simplicity and rock-solid stability. I've never experienced a failure in two decades caused by the product itself. It has only failed due to human error.
What needs improvement?
I started using MQ on a mainframe, so I understand the thinking behind it. However, there's a lot of legacy stuff lagging behind. I think a start-up company might find the approach to be outdated.
IBM could revamp the interface. The API is huge, but some developers find it limiting because of the cost. They tend to wrap the API course into the JMS, which means they're missing out on some good features. They should work a little bit on the API exposure.
Support utilities are almost non-existent. MQ is dependent on third-party companies. I write everything I use, like a Linux-based command line interface for all admin stuff.
For how long have I used the solution?
I started using MQ in 1999, so it has been around 24 years.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I rate IBM MQ 10 out of 10 for stability. I can configure the topology on my laptop and copy identical stuff into a multiple mainframe configuration.
How was the initial setup?
Setting up MQ is straightforward. Generally, installing MQ isn't a big deal. It's a simple product. The magic happens when you go configure the topology and do some performance tuning.
I work for a huge company, so the deployment is done by DevOps. We're on the application side. The installation was dodgy in versions 5 or 6, but now you just drop a container. We try to automate as much as possible, so we wrote extended Jenkins jobs to flash install all the virtual machinesWe don't deploy MQ on the cloud, but I'm thinking of migrating it to Azure. I see no benefit in a private cloud.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
IBM could lower the price because many companies are abandoning MQ from Mickey Mouse products like RabbitMQ and Kafka. Kafka is horrible but free.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Buyer's Guide
IBM MQ
October 2025

Learn what your peers think about IBM MQ. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2025.
871,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Product Development Manager at Arab Bank
It's easy to set up and scale, but the monitoring and performance could be better
Pros and Cons
- "Setting up MQ is easy. We had a "grow as you go" implementation strategy. We started with a single channel and progressed to multiple queues and channels depending on the systems and integrations with other systems. It was a gradual deployment and expansion as we grew the services interacting with the core system using MQ."
- "The monitoring could be improved. It's a pain to monitor the throughput through the MQ. The maximum throughput for a queue or single channel isn't clear. We could also use some professional services by IBM to assess and tune the performance."
What is our primary use case?
We use to connect the core banking system to several other systems in our environment. We are working on an IBM server with multiple clients sending XML messages through the IBM environment using MQ.
The end users are working on front-end services that are communicating with the servers. We are installing MQ on the backend system to act as middleware. Mainly the users are coming from somewhere else.
What needs improvement?
The monitoring could be improved. It's a pain to monitor the throughput through the MQ. The maximum throughput for a queue or single channel isn't clear. We could also use some professional services by IBM to assess and tune the performance.
For how long have I used the solution?
I started using MQ around eight to 10 years ago.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
MQ is stable, but we face some limitations with redundancy.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
MQ is scalable.
How are customer service and support?
I rate IBM support eight out of 10. We've never had problems with support.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We previously used different protocols like TCP socket connections. Now, most of the services use MQ.
How was the initial setup?
Setting up MQ is easy. We had a "grow as you go" implementation strategy. We started with a single channel and progressed to multiple queues and channels depending on the systems and integrations with other systems. It was a gradual deployment and expansion as we grew the services interacting with the core system using MQ. Maintenance requires two or three admins.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The MQ license is a bit high. I rate IBM MQ six out of 10 for affordability.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We are exploring other solutions, including the Kafka platform. There are other services that can do the same thing but maybe offer some additional features, especially on the monitoring side. It may be faster as well.
We are using Confluent Kafka for some other services, and it's a good event-streaming platform. It does almost the same thing as message queuing, but we it has some other features and can do some things better than MQ.
What other advice do I have?
I rate IBM MQ seven out of 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Project Manager at Capgemini
Reliable and stable solution that includes support from the IBM technical team
Pros and Cons
- "IBM MQ is robust compared to other products in the market. It also gives you support from the IBM team."
- "We would like to see the IBM technical support team extend their hand to providing support for other cloud vendors like Azure, Google Cloud, and AWS"
What is our primary use case?
We are using version 9.2. The solution is deployed on the cloud and Azure is the provider.
There are four people in my company who are working with IBM MQ.
What is most valuable?
IBM MQ is robust compared to other products in the market. It also gives you support from the IBM team. We can connect to the IBM technical team in case of any production fault or errors.
For security, we have IBM MQ instead of any other products.
What needs improvement?
IBM support team is really only concerned with the IBM cloud. They're not supporting any other cloud platforms or suggestions. It would be nice if we could get support for Azure.
MQ supports more than 4MB of data transmitting. That is not supported by ASB. Because of this feature, we are using MQ. Otherwise, clients will be motivated to use Azure Service Bus. IBM MQ should think about how the cost can be minimized and how to provide better service for users. MQ could provide more incentives or services that are better than Service Bus, so that our users will be motivated to use IBM MQ.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using this solution for about seven years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It's very reliable and stable. We haven't received any frequent challenges.
We have sufficient memory and storage. From a network point of view, the TCP/IP protocols are challenging.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It's easy to expand and easy to scale.
How are customer service and support?
We would like to see the IBM technical support team extend their hand to providing support for other cloud vendors like Azure, Google Cloud, and AWS.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I also have experience with RabbitMQ. IBM MQ has more valuable features and is more reliable in comparison when it comes to servers and applications.
How was the initial setup?
Initial deployment is very simple. You don't need someone who is very technical to configure it, unless you are establishing a new environment or a server, or infrastructure as a service. If you're upgrading things, it's very easy.
We use one support engineer for maintenance. They monitor the server and infrastructure.
What about the implementation team?
Deployment was done in-house. We've had some challenges, but that can be fixed while we are connected with our IBM MQ support team.
The length of deployment depends on if there is a huge queue manager and on the type of integrations that need to be done. If it's a simple integration or there are less than 100 or 200 applications, deployment will take four to five hours.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Small-scale companies may not want to buy IBM MQ because of its high cost. There are freeware in the markets, and many users are motivated to use those.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate this solution 9 out of 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Microsoft Azure
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer. Partner
Director of Internet Technologies Division at IBA Group
A stable and scalable solution with a good user interface and easy installation
Pros and Cons
- "The solution is easy to understand and even medium developers can easily start using it."
- "More documentation would be good because some features are not deeply implemented."
What is our primary use case?
We mainly use IBM MQ when creating the integration buses for different customers. For example, for creating external API for the internal systems, we use IBM MQ quite extensively.
What is most valuable?
The interface is good, and we work using API functionality in the main part of our projects. The solution is easy to understand and even medium developers can easily start using it.
What needs improvement?
More documentation would be good because some features are not deeply implemented.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using the solution for more than ten years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It is a stable solution. I rate the stability nine out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The solution is highly scalable. We have a number of projects with more than one hundred thousand users. I rate the scalability ten out of ten.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is easy. If the required access and permissions are provided, the deployment takes one day or less. But in most cases, we wait for some permissions or access to systems to finish the deployment on the customer site. One DevOps employee is enough for the deployment.
I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The pricing seems good according to the functionality that the solution provides.
What other advice do I have?
It is a very stable and scalable product and is a market leader in its appropriate sector. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer. Partner
Assistant consultant at vvolve management consultants
Good publish and subscribe features but needs a front-end monitoring tool
Pros and Cons
- "Technical support is quite helpful."
- "If they could have some front-end monitoring tool that could be easily available for the team to use, that could be great."
What is our primary use case?
There were some long-running processes where it was timing out. We got the request from this source application, and we put the data into IBM MQ. Then, we read the data from IBM MQ before doing the rest of the processing. Especially for real-time processes, we have just decoupled it into two different ways to ensure there is no time-out.
What is most valuable?
The publish and subscribe features are the most useful aspects of the solution.
It's not too difficult to set up the solution.
It's stable.
Technical support is quite helpful.
The moment you send the data, there is no latency there.
We haven't experienced any data loss.
What needs improvement?
If they could have some front-end monitoring tool that could be easily available for the team to use, that could be great. While you may not be able to edit your messages, at least if you could look at them, see the queue, and what's inside, et cetera, that would be helpful. We'd like visibility on the health of the environment.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've used the solution for two years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The stability is good. In fact, we have not seen any issues. Only recently have we observed an issue. There was a limit on the number of messages it could contain. We are having an issue now, however, we have not usually seen any issues related to IBM MQ. Therefore, in general, the solution is stable. I'd rate its reliability eight out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I haven't seriously explored the scalability of the product and therefore don't know the full scope of scalability.
We handle about 300 to 400 transactions per day.
How are customer service and support?
Technical support is very helpful and responsive. We are satisfied with the level of support we get.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I have previously used TIBCO EMS as well.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is pretty easy. It's not that complex. I'd rate the ease of implementation at a seven or eight out of ten.
The deployment time is pretty short. It's not a long process.
In an integration scenario, like payment processing, where the payment has to go to the backend system, SAP, or talk to multiple applications, due to the fact that it's a lengthy, complex business process, we just decouple it. Some of the information we get immediately after receiving the request, and we pass on the information to the customer. Then, we put the payload into the IBM MQ, and then we started processing from IBM MQ. So there are integrations that sometimes need to be done or worked with.
What about the implementation team?
We have an admin team that does the configuration and setup of the solution. They can do it in one or two business days.
What was our ROI?
We have witnessed an ROI while using this product. For example, we've had no data loss since using the solution
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
A different team handles the setup, and likely they also handle the licensing. I don't have any visibility on the cost of the product.
What other advice do I have?
I'm a user and customer. I'm not a core developer of IBM MQ. However, I'm a user of IBM MQ.
I'd recommend the solution to others. I'd rate it seven out of ten overall.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Solutions Director at Thesys Technologies
Reliable and stable software with good integration but the file transfer process needs improvement
Pros and Cons
- "A stable and reliable software that offers good integration between different systems."
- "Sometimes, not all messages are consumed in the queues. File transfers need improvement."
What is our primary use case?
We're using the IBM MQ series in development, integration, UAT, and production areas.
What is most valuable?
What I found most valuable in this software is its reliability because messages that are sent into the queues are consumed by the other end of the connectivity. It has helped us maintain integration between two different systems, so that has been part of one of the layers of our architecture that communicates, for example, a back-end platform and back-end core system with a front-end platform. In our case, we are using the backend as a 224 banking system and the frontend we are using the Wall Street front office system. Those two systems are interconnected via the IBM MQ series.
What needs improvement?
An area for improvement for this software is that sometimes, messages are not consumed in the queues. We have seen queues where not all messages are emptied. That issue has been solved by our IBM team located in Spain, but we haven't received detailed technical information as to why those queues are not totally consumed. A probable reason could be some service and availability issue because of server updates in IBM MQ itself, or server updates related to the operating system, which in our case, we are using Red Hat Linux.
I have seen a lot of problems with the file transfers, e.g. using FTP or SFTP or LFTP. Normally with all these kinds of transfers, they are not on a transaction boundary, meaning a transfer can fail during the execution. We are not certain why it hasn't reached the destination as these protocols are not transactional which you normally have in MQ messages. What I would like to see in the next release is a solution for the MQ file transfer. I saw some literature about it, but I am not sure if the feature is available, or if it will be easy to configure and maintain in the bank.
For how long have I used the solution?
We've used IBM MQ within the last year. We've being using it on a continuous basis because it is the secure platform we have in our banking system.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
IBM MQ is very stable. It's the best server in terms of interconnectivity. The reliability that the MQ series has, I haven't seen in other servers that are also based in MQ.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
My impression of the scalability of this software: We started with a very easy installation where we have very few queues defined. Then, we had a huge integration where we applied, pulled, and observed that the scalability is very straightforward. We also found an easy way: making an active-passive configuration automatic. For example: If you have one active server going down, the passive server is switched on automatically, without us needing to do anything from our end, which means the active-passive configuration works properly.
How are customer service and support?
I haven't been involved in contacting IBM's support, but in general, we didn't have any vendor issues.
How was the initial setup?
The setup for this software was very complex, particularly with the integration between the two systems I was talking about earlier: on the core backend and on the user frontend that is the Wall Street system. It has a lot of different types of flows, and all those flows are defined into the server that is called TTI that is working under the MQ series. That contains a lot of complexities because the vendor of the front-end system has included in the MQ side the server functionality for the application, instead of doing it directly in either the backend or the frontend. This means the MQ part is also helping with the logic for processing messages, and the logic is maintained in a layer: the MQ layer in the server that's called TTI. This is the first time we have faced such complexity, but regarding the MQ as is, meaning the vanilla version, it is quite straightforward. That server works the proper way.
What about the implementation team?
We used consultants for the implementation and those were consultants from the vendor who were already experienced in the TTI server.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The licensing for this software is on a yearly basis, but the bank is holding just one license for the entire bank: a corporate license. As for additional costs, it's a standard fee that includes the maintenance and updates that are released periodically.
What other advice do I have?
I didn't download Active MQ and IBM MQ. I was checking on the website because I wanted to know certain functionalities about those two series. So what I downloaded was the literature about their functionalities.
Regarding IBM products, the only one that I was working with was the MQ series.
All products in our organization, particularly the banking systems are on-premise. We are not yet ready to do cloud deployment.
Deployment of this software in the TTI part took three months. For the core part, deployment took approximately one month. The time that it took for deployment is also associated with the number of servers that we had.
We have four groups: development, integration, user acceptance test, and production. In each of these groups, they have their own MQ servers. We started with the installation for the development group, then going forward and solving the issues we found at the beginning with the installation instructions. We continued with the other areas until we reached the production server recently, back in mid-October.
We currently have 200 users of this software.
Deployment of the IBM MQ at core requires two people in our organization, but for the personalized application or the customized one, we have 10 people.
I'm rating this software a five because it is quite expensive and complex. I'm giving this a five over ten rating not just because it runs, but because it has a lot of features.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
Software Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Highly secure but there sometimes are complicated network issues
Pros and Cons
- "IBM is still adding some features and coding some other systems on the security end. However, it has the most security features I've seen in a communication solution. Security is the most important thing for our purposes."
- "There are many complications with IBM MQ servers."
What is our primary use case?
We provide a channel that we call "the link," so we are distributors of numbering services. These links are connected to a simulator, for example, when MQ is related to some application or the scanner. It's a synchronized communication where we first check two-step authentication. So first, we start with the authentication. In the second step, the MQ server provides the connection. Then the system decides if it can make the connection or not. For example, if I'm uploading something, it will check one cluster, not the other five. So next time, I'm just checking to see if we can connect. After that, the other side is also checking. Those clusters are physical connectivity clusters.
We are sending everything. The partner and we create an acknowledgment number and check to see if everything is fine or not. Once everything checks out and we have verified the person with our partner, we establish the connection, sending a message. Then we are also checking the permissions and format. Sometimes there are some errors, so we have to check the login acknowledgment number and figure out what the error code means. We are handling everything for the project, from the code and deployment to support. We are handling everything through an RFP repository. So from there, we are handling every version released in the last two years. Every year, we upgrade according to the guidelines.
What is most valuable?
There are so many good things with IBM MQ networking. So many complicated issues arise when you're trying to configure your network, and MQ helps by providing the clustering. In our project architecture, we have a cluster that distinguishes between major requests from applications. There is also a centralized cluster. Let's suppose 10 applications are connecting to that cluster. In each application, we add differently.
If I need to add multiple features to the centralized cluster, we can create another cluster. From there, the GMG is connected. Also, clusters can provide a backup. So suppose this solution faces some failure, like a power outage, MQ can automatically redistribute the load to other servers.
We are using the synchronizer and another module in our product. We are stepping the connection from the IBM channel. After that, we can send or receive any message. This is synchronizing. We are handling the clustering, and we have created a design for how the NP is built with the partner.
IBM is still adding some features and coding some other systems on the security end. However, it has the most security features I've seen in a communication solution. Security is the most important thing for our purposes.
What needs improvement?
Sometimes, there are network issues, which means more applications are connected to those messages, so I would like to fix that. For example, suppose there's a new network, and I want to add virtual memory to address a network issue within the cluster. So there is a network issue that needs to be resolved from the cluster. So I need to add the permissions for that particular team or particular time. There are many complications with IBM MQ servers.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been using IBM MQ since last year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
IBM MQ is reliable.
How are customer service and support?
We don't use IBM support much. Sometimes partners will come to us with questions, so we just guide them. Sometimes, you need an MQ person because they have access. We guide the customer to ask this question. You have to ask the MQ entity or the entry person. They will help you. And we are not writing any protocols because a separate team does that. And also, if anything goes wrong with the MQ product, then IBM will address that.
How was the initial setup?
From a coding perspective, it's a straightforward process. There are no complications. We cannot directly access the IBM server because there is a separate team assigned to do some security and get some code of conduct from the MQ team. They are handling the MQ server. So we ask them to create these entry servers to discuss that. And also, we are defining everything. We are responsible for handling invalid queries. So they recreate a wrong question or wrong to them. So, whatever is an appropriate question.
In terms of maintenance, there are three reasons you'll get a maintenance window. On the maintenance window, we are just restarting the epicenter. Nothing else. If it requires any patching or updates, we perform those. But you don't have to restart the application. The epicenter typically runs continuously.
What other advice do I have?
I rate IBM MQ seven out of 10. It's a good option for anything banking-related where you need secure communications. There are some other similar products out there, but I'm not about other servers. But I'm aware of our BME. So if you're doing banking or anything that requires secure channels, I would recommend IBM MQ.
Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.

Buyer's Guide
Download our free IBM MQ Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: October 2025
Product Categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software Business Activity Monitoring Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)Popular Comparisons
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform
ActiveMQ
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions
Amazon SQS
Red Hat AMQ
PubSub+ Platform
Amazon MQ
Avada Software Infrared360
EMQX
Aurea CX Messenger
TIBCO Enterprise Message Service
Oracle Event Hub Cloud Service
Amazon EventBridge
Amazon SNS
IBM Event Streams
Buyer's Guide
Download our free IBM MQ Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- What are the differences between Apache Kafka and IBM MQ?
- What is the pricing of IBM MQ for 1 license and 2 cores?
- What Is The Biggest Difference Between ActiveMQ and IBM MQ?
- What is the biggest difference between IBM MQ and RabbitMQ?
- How does IBM MQ compare with VMware RabbitMQ?
- When evaluating Message Queue, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
- What Message Queue (MQ) Software do you recommend? Why?
- What is the best MQ software out there?
- What is MQ software?
- Why is Message Queue (MQ) Software important for companies?