Compare Apache Kafka vs. IBM MQ

Apache Kafka is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 6 reviews while IBM MQ is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 9 reviews. Apache Kafka is rated 8.0, while IBM MQ is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Good scalability and excellent for storing data used for analytics but lacks a user interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "Helps integrate between applications, reduce rework, by reusing existing components". Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, ActiveMQ and Solace PubSub+, whereas IBM MQ is most compared with RabbitMQ, ActiveMQ and Apache Kafka. See our Apache Kafka vs. IBM MQ report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Apache Kafka Logo
24,626 views|16,120 comparisons
IBM MQ Logo
33,726 views|25,333 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Kafka vs. IBM MQ and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
398,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
It's an open-source product, which means it doesn't cost us anything to use it.Scalability is very good.The most valuable feature is that it can handle high volume.Kafka provides us with a way to store the data used for analytics. That's the big selling point. There's very good log management.It's very easy to keep to install and it's pretty stable.It eases our current data flow and framework.

Read more »

The most valuable features are the point to point messaging and the MQ API.It improves reliability and guarantees that messages are not lost.Reliable integration between MQ servers is the most valuable feature.Data integrity, reliability and security are valuable features that IBM MQ possesses.There is no dependency on the end party service's run status.We use queue managers/concentrators for message flow going upstream and downstream on applications with enterprise licenses.It runs everywhere, from the mainframe in the US to the PCs in the Gobi desert attached to an analog modem.Has helped integrate between applications, reduce rework, and costs by reusing working components of existing applications.

Read more »

Cons
The UI is based on command line. It would be helpful if they could come up with a simpler user interface.In the next release, I would like for there to be some authorization and HTL security.Kafka does not provide control over the message queue, so we do not know whether we are experiencing lost or duplicate messages.If the graphical user interface was easier for the Kafka administration it would be much better. Right now, you need to use the program with the command-line interface. If the graphical user interface was easier, it could be a better product.The third party is not very stable and sometimes you have problems with this component. There are some developments in newer versions and we're about to try them out, but I'm not sure if it closes the gap.Kafka 2.0 has been released for over a month, and I wanted to try out the new features. However, the configuration is a little bit complicated: Kafka Broker, Kafka Manager, ZooKeeper Servers, etc.

Read more »

I would like to see faster monitoring tools for this solution.I believe there is too much code to be done in order to handle the elements that you develop.I believe the stability of the product has decreased since we began using it initially.MQ needs instruments for connection with new modern queues like Kafka or RabbitMQ.SonicMQ CAA (continuous availability architecture) functionality on auto failover and data persistence should be made available without a shared drive, as it exists in multi-instance queue managers.It could get a face lift with a modern marketing campaign.the level of training as well as product marketing for this product are not that great. You rarely find a good training institute that provides training. Many of the architects in several organization are neither aware of the product nor interested in using it. IBM should provide good training on products like this.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Apache Kafka is open-source and can be used free of charge.

Read more »

To implement such an IBM solution, a company has to pay a lot in term of licensing and consultancy. A pricing model might be a better option.In terms of cost, IBM MQ is slightly on the higher side.IBM MQ appliance has pricing options, but they are costly.99.999 percent availability for less than a penny per message over the past 25 years. IBM MQ is the cheapest software in the IBM software portfolio, and it is one of the best.Pricing could be better, as with all IBM products. But their performance in production, along with security and scalability, will pay returns in the long run.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
398,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
24,626
Comparisons
16,120
Reviews
5
Average Words per Review
432
Avg. Rating
8.0
Views
33,726
Comparisons
25,333
Reviews
9
Average Words per Review
225
Avg. Rating
8.9
Top Comparisons
Compared 30% of the time.
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 17% of the time.
Compared 36% of the time.
Compared 28% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Also Known As
WebSphere MQ
Learn
Apache
IBM
Overview

Apache Kafka is a distributed streaming platform, with the following capabilities:

  • It lets you publish and subscribe to streams of records. In this respect it is similar to a message queue or enterprise messaging system.
  • It lets you store streams of records in a fault-tolerant way.
  • It lets you process streams of records as they occur.

Apache Kafka gets used for two broad classes of application:

  • Building real-time streaming data pipelines that reliably get data between systems or applications.
  • Building real-time streaming applications that transform or react to the streams of data.

    IBM MQ provides the universal messaging backbone for service-oriented architecture (SOA) connectivity. It connects virtually any commercial IT system, whether on premise, in the cloud, or a mixture. For more than 20 years IBM has led the market in messaging middleware and more than 10,000 businesses across all geographies and industries rely on IBM MQ.

    Visit for your trial here.

Offer
Learn more about Apache Kafka
Learn more about IBM MQ
Sample Customers
Information Not Available
Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Software R&D Company20%
Retailer20%
Logistics Company10%
Financial Services Firm10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company31%
Financial Services Firm19%
Comms Service Provider10%
Retailer8%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm31%
Insurance Company14%
Retailer13%
Healthcare Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company31%
Comms Service Provider14%
Financial Services Firm11%
Retailer8%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business30%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise59%
REVIEWERS
Small Business2%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise89%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business12%
Large Enterprise88%
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Kafka vs. IBM MQ and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
398,259 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.