Compare IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Mule ESB
 | Shubhashis Panda Solution Designer at a tech services company |
 | Ravi Gunda Senior Architect at a tech services company |
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Mule ESB and other solutions. Updated: May 2021.
509,570 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 has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"The solution has good integration."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"The most valuable feature of Mule ESB is data transformation, i.e. our interacting with different systems and orchestrating for our business needs."
"The most valuable feature is the Salesforce integration."
"The connectivity the solution provides is excellent. There are often too many systems that we have to integrate and this helps with that."
"Easy connectivity and easy integration."
"The transformation and the data format are the features that I like the most."
"The most valuable feature for Mule is the number of connectors that are available."
"Everything runs in Java, which is a useful feature."
"What Mule provides out-of-box is a sufficient product."
Cons
"The user interface is designed mainly for experts, much in the way a BPM or another integration tool is."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"Mule ESB is more into the latest REST APIs, not much into the SOAP web services. Developing is all about web services and not easy with Mule."
"The Anypoint platform consumes a lot of memory, and it would be great for developers if it were more lightweight."
"The solution isn't as stable as we'd like it to be. There are some ongoing issues and therefore Mule has to provide frequent patches. Mule's core IP should be more stable overall."
"Lacking some connectors that could be included."
"It's not easy to troubleshoot and we still can't make it work."
"MuleSoft is not so strong in method-based integration, so they're not so functional in that regard."
"There are some issues with both stability and scalability."
"There are limitations with the subscription model that comes with the product."
"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."
"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."
"This product is more expensive than competing products."
"I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."
"The various features and components for this solution are no longer free."
"The licensing is yearly, and there are additional fees for services."
"This product is cheaper than some offered by other vendors, although there is a problem because you have to pay for some third-party adapters."
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which ESB solutions are best for your needs.
509,570 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Answer: Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage.
Top Answer: There are always additional fees.
Top Answer: If you want to connect to the database, it provides solutions in India, but you have to purchase it separately. They are not mature enough and we have difficulties using them. They are expensive and… more »
Top Answer: The cloud and integration abilities are most useful allowing us to use applications such as Salesforce and DataWeave.
Top Answer: This product is cheaper than some offered by other vendors, although there is a problem because you have to pay for some third-party adapters.
Top Answer: In an upcoming release, I would like to see more additional concept for exception handling, batch processing, and increased integration with other application.
Views
3,300
Comparisons
2,777
Reviews
5
Average Words per Review
541
Rating
7.8
Views
21,615
Comparisons
15,547
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
507
Rating
7.4
Compared 54% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 21% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 2% of the time.
WebSphere Message Broker
WebSphere Message Broker is an enterprise service bus (ESB) providing connectivity and universal data transformation for service-oriented architecture (SOA) and non-SOA environments. It allows businesses of any size to eliminate point-to-point connections and batch processing regardless of platform, protocol or data format.
For companies looking to modernize and unlock the value of existing on-premises systems and applications, an enterprise service bus (ESB) architecture serves as a critical foundation layer for SOA. When deployed as an ESB, the Mule runtime engine of Anypoint Platform combines the power of data and application integration across legacy systems and SaaS applications, with a seamless path to the other capabilities of Anypoint Platform and the full power of API-led connectivity.
Learn more about IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Learn more about Mule ESB
WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire
Ube, PacificComp, University of Witwatersrand, Justice Systems, Camelot
Computer Software Company27%
Comms Service Provider15%
Financial Services Firm12%
Insurance Company9%
Computer Software Company37%
Comms Service Provider15%
Financial Services Firm7%
Energy/Utilities Company7%
No Data Available
Small Business37%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise51%
Small Business21%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise69%
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Mule ESB and other solutions. Updated: May 2021.
509,570 professionals have used our research since 2012.
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 7th in ESB with 5 reviews while Mule ESB is ranked 2nd in ESB with 9 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while Mule ESB is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Message Broker writes "Easy to setup and deploy, with easy mapping, and it integrates well with MQ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mule ESB writes "Easy to implement and supports platforms like Windows, Linux, and Mac". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, IBM DataPower Gateway, IBM BPM and IBM WebSphere Application Server, whereas Mule ESB is most compared with webMethods Integration Server, IBM Integration Bus, Red Hat Fuse, Oracle Service Bus and IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker vs. Mule ESB report.
See our list of best ESB vendors.
We monitor all ESB 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.