We performed a comparison between Anypoint MQ and IBM MQ 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."
"Good interface, simple to use and stable."
"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."
"Messaging and queueing solution that has good stability and scalability. It can be used for a variety of messaging types."
"The solution is scalable, and its performance is quite good."
"We use simple queues and exchanges to route messages to multiple queues. The publish/subscribe model is also helpful."
"It's easy to use and comes as a bundle package with the Anypoint Platform, removing the need for any complex setup."
"This product has good security."
"This initial setup is not complex at all. Deploying it was very easy."
"IBM MQ is the right choice because of the stability and the performance. And from the support perspective, it's enough to have a really small team."
"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."
"I haven't seen any severe issues related to it. Most of the time it's running. That is the advantage of IBM MQ."
"The high availability and session recovery are the most valuable features because we need the solution live all day."
"Encryption and the fact that we have not had any data loss issues so far have been very valuable features. IBM MQ is well encrypted so that we are well within our compliance and regulatory requirements, so that is a plus point as well."
"Currently, we are not using many advanced features. We are only using point-to-point MQ. I have previously used features like context-based authentication, SSL authentication, and high availability. These are good and pretty cool features. They make your business reliable. For critical business needs, everyone uses only IBM MQ. It is the first choice because of its reliability. There is a one-send-and-one-delivery feature. It also has a no-message-loss feature, and because of that, only IBM MQ is used in banking or financial sectors."
"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."
"Anypoint MQ could improve the user interface."
"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."
"Information on monitoring could be improved."
"It's extremely expensive to change things in Anypoint MQ. There's also this issue of slow output of messages, and that needs to be improved."
"The solution is very costly. The solution should provide a package with fewer capabilities at a lower price for specific companies that don’t have a big IT budget. Not every customer requires all the capabilities of the software. It will be a good fit in the market, and they will easily sell it more."
"The product does not provide a priority level for the message."
"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."
"It needs a User Interface which is better than the aging MQ Explorer. The existing solution MQ Explorer is outdated."
"With IBM products, there's less marketing. If they do more demos and more seminars on their products, it will be very useful. On a given day. I get seminar invites for many vendors and products, but for IBM, I may get an invite once or twice a year."
"IBM MQ could improve by adding more protocols or APIs for a standard application, such as MuleSoft."
"IBM HQ's scalability isn't the best."
"Scaling is difficult with IBM MQ."
"In the next release, I would like for there to be easier monitoring. The UI should be easier for non-technical users to set up appliances and servers."
"Should have more integration in the monitoring tools."
"I can't say pricing is good."
Anypoint MQ is ranked 7th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 10 reviews while IBM MQ is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 158 reviews. Anypoint MQ is rated 7.0, while IBM MQ is rated 8.4. 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 IBM MQ writes "Offers the ability to batch metadata transfers between systems that support MQ as the communication method". Anypoint MQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, Apache Kafka, Amazon SQS, VMware Tanzu Data Services and PubSub+ Event Broker, whereas IBM MQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, Apache Kafka, VMware Tanzu Data Services, Red Hat AMQ and TIBCO Enterprise Message Service. See our Anypoint MQ vs. IBM MQ 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.