IBM MQ vs. RabbitMQ

As of March 2019, IBM MQ is ranked 1st in Message Queue with 63 reviews vs RabbitMQ which is ranked 2nd in Message Queue with 9 reviews. The top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "I like that the ability to add applications to it is simple". The top reviewer of RabbitMQ writes "One crucial feature was guaranteed messaging. There are idiosyncrasies in the Windows version". IBM MQ is most compared with RabbitMQ, ActiveMQ and Apache Kafka. RabbitMQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, IBM MQ and Apache Kafka. See our IBM MQ vs. RabbitMQ report.
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
29,770 views|19,380 comparisons
RabbitMQ Logo
29,125 views|22,474 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM MQ vs. RabbitMQ and other solutions. Updated: March 2019.
325,421 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:

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.Integrates between distributed systems: For example, it can help integrate processing between mainframe, client-server, web-based applications by integrating the messages, supporting Service Oriented Architecture.

Read more »

We have been able to set up a messaging system that facilitates data integration between the software modules that we sell.RabbitMQ will help to remove a lot of the complexities and create a loosely coupled codebase.I like the high throughput of 20K messages/sec, and that it supports multiple protocols.The message routing is the most valuable feature. It is effective and flexible.After creating a RabbitMQ service, they provide you with a sort of web management dashboard.The product's reliability is the most valuable feature.Simple and straightforward admin portals: Made it easy for users and worked out excellently for our requirementsVery sophisticated routing control and priority messaging capabilities

Read more »

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.It needs a User Interface which is better than the aging MQ Explorer. The existing solution MQ Explorer is outdated.The installation of product upgrades and patches is very difficult. It requires the use of the IBM Installation Manager (IM).

Read more »

RabbitMQ is clearly better supported on Linux than it is on Windows. There are idiosyncrasies in the Windows version that are not there on Linux.The next release should include some of the flexibility and features that Kafka offers.The debugging capabilities and testing flexibilities need to be improved.I’d like this dashboard to use web sockets, so it would actually be in real time. It would slightly increase debugging, etc.The product has to improve the crisis management, especially in memory issues.The solution needs improvement on performance.The fact that a single queue can't be distributed across multiple instances/nodes is a major disadvantage.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
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.I think the pricing is reasonable, especially with IIB as a part of it.Use the new and lightweight version (Liberty) to lower licensing costs. It is also easier to upgrade/maintain.IBM MQ has a flexible license model based on the Processor Value Unit (PVU) and I recommend it.

Read more »

This is an open source solution.The pricing is okay.

Read more »

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue solutions are best for your needs.
325,421 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Answers from the Community
Rhea Rapps
Dave Mc AllisterVendor

I say RabbitMQ over IBM MQ. RabbitMQ has a number of things going for it, free to use, easy to set up and enjoys wide community backing. Since the team is part of Pivotal, it also has a solid backing and superb engineering.

RabbitMQ (IMHO) also embases a more modern style of messaging queuing. While it might not meet certain other products in pure throughput, its ease, support for both on-premise, PaaS and public clouds make it the winner. And keep in mind that tens of thousands of companies use it in production.

Go RabbitMQ. Leave that proprietary stuff behind (especially when the open source _is_ the better product).

07 March 18
Ibrahim Abu HdaibUser

Unfortunately, until now I haven't used any of them. But I have made some stress tests on RabbitMQ on persistence mode and the performance was great.

26 March 18
Susan EustisUser

IBM MQ is by far the superior product, robust, works like they say it does, etc.

15 March 18
Ashish HiranandaniReal User

I pretty much agree with previous comments; IBM MQ is rock solid; IBM MQ Concentrator could be leveraged for license/cost saving options. You might want to consider Apache Kafka if it fits with your usecase.

08 March 18
fjb_saperReal User

I would need to raise the vendor flag here and come back with IBM MQ.

It may have a steeper learning curve compared to Rabbit but on the other hand who are you going to call in the middle of the night when you have an incident and don't know how to fix it?

It is solid, and most of the banks use it. That should speak for itself about quality.

The development edition has been free for over 2 years now, and the cost per core is really affordable for QA and production. It is a very versatile product, has great following see and the Vienna university list server

08 March 18
out of 13 in Message Queue
Avg. Rating
out of 13 in Message Queue
Avg. Rating
Top Comparisons
Compared 37% of the time.
Compared 27% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 50% of the time.
Compared 32% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Also Known As
WebSphere MQRabbitMQ by Pivotal, Rabbit

    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.

  • RabbitMQ is the most popular open source message broker, with more than 35,000 production deployments world-wide. RabbitMQ is lightweight and easy to deploy on premises and in the cloud and runs on all major operating systems. It supports most developer platforms, multiple messaging protocols and can be deployed in distributed and federated configurations to meet high-scale, high-availability requirements.
Learn more about IBM MQ
Learn more about RabbitMQ
Sample Customers
Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Information Not Available
Top Industries
Financial Services Firm29%
Insurance Company15%
Healthcare Company8%
Financial Services Firm34%
Insurance Company17%
Engineering Company8%
Hospitality Company10%
Financial Services Firm10%
Transportation Company10%
Financial Services Firm24%
Insurance Company15%
Transportation Company13%
Engineering Company6%
Company Size
Small Business2%
Midsize Enterprise10%
Large Enterprise88%
Small Business11%
Midsize Enterprise3%
Large Enterprise86%
Small Business37%
Midsize Enterprise19%
Large Enterprise44%
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise7%
Large Enterprise84%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM MQ vs. RabbitMQ and other solutions. Updated: March 2019.
325,421 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Message Queue 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.

Sign Up with Email