We performed a comparison between Anypoint MQ and Apache Kafka based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment is a cakewalk."
"The use of ACK is valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Anypoint MQ is it comes with MuleSoft so we don't have to maintain separate components."
"The solution is very scalable with solid performance and the capability of extending it using any custom Java in case you don't have anything out of the box. MDP is strong. It is good compared to other products regarding its capabilities in managing or orchestrating the issue load."
"Messaging and queueing solution that has good stability and scalability. It can be used for a variety of messaging types."
"Good interface, simple to use and stable."
"It's easy to use and comes as a bundle package with the Anypoint Platform, removing the need for any complex setup."
"We use simple queues and exchanges to route messages to multiple queues. The publish/subscribe model is also helpful."
"Resiliency is great and also the fact that it handles different data formats."
"The most valuable feature is that it can handle high volume."
"Apache Kafka has good integration capabilities and has plenty of adapters in its ecosystem if you want to build something. There are adapters for many platforms, such as Java, Azure, and Microsoft's ecosystem. Other solutions, such as Pulsar have fewer adapters available."
"It is the performance that is really meaningful."
"For example, when you want to send a message to inform all your clients about a new feature, you can publish that message to a single topic in Apache Kafka. This allows all clients subscribed to that topic to receive the message. On the other hand, if you need to send billing information to a specific customer, you can publish that message on a topic dedicated to that customer. This message can then be sent as an SMS to the customer, allowing them to view it on their mobile device."
"The main advantage is increased reliability, particularly with regard to data and the speed with which messages are published to the other side."
"The publisher-subscriber pattern and low latency are also essential features that greatly piqued my interest."
"Scalability is very good."
"The solution's licensing model is expensive and could be improved."
"When we are integrating with other applications, readily available connectors make it easy. However, when it comes to external applications, connectivity isn't as straightforward."
"Information on monitoring could be improved."
"The product does not provide a priority level for the message."
"Anypoint MQ could improve the user interface."
"The customer service is not good enough"
"There are so many solutions like this, but this is not as mature as those products. The other MQ products have the capability of reprocessing and maintaining the persistence of the data. They can handle large volumes and large messages, but Anypoint MQ doesn't have those capabilities."
"Anypoint MQ's capabilities are mainly used for messaging purposes, but it doesn't have typical use cases that extend as far as other Message Queue software."
"The product is good, but it needs implementation and on-going support. The whole cloud engagement model has made the adoption of Kafka better due to PaaS (Amazon Kinesis, a fully managed service by AWS)."
"The interface has room for improvement, and there is a steep learning curve for Hadoop integration. It was a struggle learning to send from Hadoop to Kafka. In future releases, I'd like to see improvements in ETL functionality and Hadoop integration."
"The user interface is one weakness. Sometimes, our data isn't as accessible as we'd like. It takes a lot of work to retrieve the data and the index."
"More adapters for connecting to different systems need to be available."
"Something that could be improved is having an interface to monitor the consuming rate."
"Maintaining and configuring Apache Kafka can be challenging, especially when you want to fine-tune its behavior."
"We struggled a bit with the built-in data transformations because it was a challenge to get them up and running the way we wanted."
"The repository isn't working very well. It's not user friendly."
Anypoint MQ is ranked 7th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 10 reviews while Apache Kafka is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 78 reviews. Anypoint MQ is rated 7.0, while Apache Kafka is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Anypoint MQ writes "Useful for asynchronous messaging, but it lacks features, and the storage is limited". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Real-time processing and reliable for data integrity". Anypoint MQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, Amazon SQS, VMware Tanzu Data Services, IBM MQ and PubSub+ Event Broker, whereas Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ, PubSub+ Event Broker and VMware Tanzu Data Services. See our Anypoint MQ vs. Apache Kafka report.
See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.
We monitor all Message Queue (MQ) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
