Compare IBM MQ vs. RabbitMQ

IBM MQ is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 10 reviews while RabbitMQ is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 3 reviews. IBM MQ is rated 9.0, while RabbitMQ is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "Helps integrate between applications, reduce rework, by reusing existing components". On the other hand, 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, whereas RabbitMQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, IBM MQ and Apache Kafka. See our IBM MQ vs. RabbitMQ report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
IBM MQ Logo
33,081 views|24,567 comparisons
RabbitMQ Logo
36,758 views|28,912 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM MQ vs. RabbitMQ and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
373,262 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
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 »

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.

Read more »

Cons
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.It needs a User Interface which is better than the aging MQ Explorer. The existing solution MQ Explorer is outdated.

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.

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.

Read more »

This is an open source solution.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
373,262 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Answers from the Community
Miriam Tover
fjb_saperReal User

The biggest difference is the number of platforms supported. I have never heard of RabbitMQ running on ZOS (mind you ZOS and not z/Linux).
The same way I don't know that the AS400 platform would support RabbitMQ. Also, I don't think RabbitMQ has the same ease of use and set up that IBM MQ has.

Next thing to consider is support. Think about how long it will take to get support for RabbitMQ and a Fix vs the time to get support from IBM. Finally and not the least, you will also want to compare the features (like assured delivery).

16 July 19
Ranking
Views
33,081
Comparisons
24,567
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
227
Avg. Rating
9.0
Views
36,758
Comparisons
28,912
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
287
Avg. Rating
8.3
Top Comparisons
Compared 37% of the time.
Compared 29% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 50% of the time.
Compared 31% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Also Known As
WebSphere MQRabbitMQ by Pivotal, Rabbit
Learn
IBM
Pivotal
Overview

    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.
Offer
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
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm30%
Insurance Company15%
Retailer14%
Healthcare Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company26%
Financial Services Firm15%
Comms Service Provider10%
Retailer9%
REVIEWERS
University20%
Hospitality Company10%
Financial Services Firm10%
Transportation Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company29%
Comms Service Provider13%
Financial Services Firm10%
Insurance Company6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business2%
Midsize Enterprise10%
Large Enterprise88%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business16%
Midsize Enterprise3%
Large Enterprise81%
REVIEWERS
Small Business39%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise43%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business6%
Midsize Enterprise10%
Large Enterprise84%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM MQ vs. RabbitMQ and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
373,262 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.
Sign Up with Email