Compare IBM Event Streams vs. IBM MQ

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
IBM Event Streams Logo
280 views|219 comparisons
IBM MQ Logo
30,258 views|22,252 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Use IBM Event Streams? Share your opinion.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Apache, Solace and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software. Updated: January 2021.
457,459 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
"I'm an administrator, and what I like most is the interface, the security, and the storage."

More IBM Event Streams Pros »

"The most valuable features are the point to point messaging and the MQ API.""The high availability and session recovery are the most valuable features because we need the solution live all day.""It is stable, reliable, and scalable.""Whenever payments are happening, such as incoming payments to the bank, we need to notify the customer. With MQ we can actually do that asynchronously. We don't want to notify the customer for each and every payment but, rather, more like once a day. That kind of thing can be enabled with the help of MQ.""It's highly scalable. It provides various ways to establish high availability and workloads. E.g., you can spread workloads inside of your clusters.""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.""The MQ protocol is widely used across multiple applications and it's so simple for connectivity.""What is quite useful is the asynchronous function which means we don't lose everything in the bank. Although we use a lot of things synchronously, asynch is the best thing so that no banking information is ever lost, even when the network goes down and comes up."

More IBM MQ Pros »

Cons
"In the next release, I would like to see the GUI allow you to configure the security section."

More IBM Event Streams Cons »

"I would like to see faster monitoring tools for this solution.""If they could come up with monitoring dashboards that would be good. We are using external monitoring tools, apart from our IBM MQ, to monitor IBM MQ. If we could get monitoring tools or dashboards to keep everything simple for the user to understand, that would be good.""I would like to see it integrate with the newer ways of messaging, such as Kafka. They might say that you have IBM Integration Bus to do that stuff, but it would be great if MQ could, out-of-the-box, listen to public Kafka.""They could integrate monitoring into the solution, a bit more than they do now. Currently, they have opened the REST API so you can get statistic and accounting information and details from MQ and build your own monitoring, if you want. IBM can improve the solution in this direction.""What could be improved is the high-availability. The way MQ works is that it separates the high-availability from the workload balance. The scalability should be easier. If something happens so that the messages are not available on each node, scalability is only possible for the workload balance.""The scalability is the one area where IBM has fallen behind. As much as it is used, there is a limit to the number of people who are skilled in MQ. That is definitely an issue. Places have kept their MQ-skilled people and other places have really struggled to get MQ skills. It's not a widely-known skillset.""In terms of volume, it is not able to handle a huge volume. We also have limitations of queues related to IBM MQ. We often need to handle a very big volume, but currently we do have limitations. If those kinds of limitations could be relaxed, it would help us to work better.""You should be able to increase the message size. It should be dynamic. Each queue has a limitation of 5,000."

More IBM MQ Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"The pricing needs to be improved."

More IBM Event Streams Pricing and Cost Advice »

"The price is high.""There is a different platform price between Windows, z/OS, and iSeries.""IBM products, in general, have high licensing costs and support costs are too high.""Most of our customers are quite happy with the solution but they have an issue with the cost. They want to move to cheaper solutions.""It is a very expensive product compared to the open source products in the market.""It would be a 10 out of 10 if it wasn't so expensive.""It's a very expensive product.""IBM MQ is expensive and they charge based on the CPU."

More IBM MQ Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
457,459 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Top Answer: Hi As someone with 45+ years of experience in the Transaction and Message Processing world, I have seen many "MQ" solutions that have come into the market place. From my perspective, while each… more »
Top Answer: The most valuable feature is the stability. It's perfect in this way.
Ranking
Views
280
Comparisons
219
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
492
Rating
9.0
Views
30,258
Comparisons
22,252
Reviews
28
Average Words per Review
539
Rating
8.3
Popular Comparisons
Compared 21% of the time.
Compared 30% of the time.
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 20% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
Also Known As
WebSphere MQ
Learn
IBM
IBM
Overview

Built on open source Apache Kafka, IBM Event Streams is an event-streaming platform that helps you build smart applications that can react to events as they happen. IBM Event Streams is based on years of operational expertise IBM has gained from running Apache Kafka event streams for enterprises

    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 IBM Event Streams
Learn more about IBM MQ
Sample Customers
American Airlines, UBank, Bitly, Eurobits, Active International, Bison, Contextor, Constance Hotels, Resorts & Golf, Creval, Deloitte, ExxonMobil, FaceMe, FacePhi, Fitzsoft, Fuga Technologies, Guardio, Honeywell, Japanese airline, Jenzabar, KONEDeutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Top Industries
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm36%
Retailer13%
Insurance Company12%
Transportation Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company33%
Comms Service Provider15%
Financial Services Firm13%
Media Company5%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business5%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise85%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business6%
Midsize Enterprise5%
Large Enterprise89%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Apache, Solace and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software. Updated: January 2021.
457,459 professionals have used our research since 2012.

IBM Event Streams is ranked 7th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 1 review while IBM MQ is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 31 reviews. IBM Event Streams is rated 9.0, while IBM MQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Event Streams writes "Easy to use, stable, has a good interface, and the security is good". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "We don't lose messages in transit and we can store messages and forward them when required". IBM Event Streams is most compared with Red Hat AMQ, whereas IBM MQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, VMware RabbitMQ, ActiveMQ, PubSub+ Event Broker and Amazon SQS.

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.