We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Mule ESB Logo
18,904 views|14,251 comparisons
Red Hat Fuse Logo
6,502 views|4,090 comparisons
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Mule ESB vs. Red Hat Fuse and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
552,305 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
"What Mule provides out-of-box is a sufficient product.""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 solution has a good graphical interface.""Everything runs in Java, which is a useful feature.""The solution offers multiple deployment options.""The most valuable feature for Mule is the number of connectors that are available."

More Mule ESB Pros »

"We usually had used PowerCenter for master data integration (by replication). But in some cases, it was better to use Fuse for providing the master data online. It doesn't make it necessary to replicate data.""The most valuable feature is the software development environment.""The installation is quite okay. We don't really change much in the configuration. Most of the time, most of the settings remain with the default and we are able to handle our needs using the default setting.""The most valuable part of Fuse is the fact that it's based on Red Hat Apache Camel. It is really good that it already comes with so many different connectors. That makes it relatively easy to use. We use their XML definition to define the routes, making it really easy to define the routing."

More Red Hat Fuse Pros »

Cons
"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.""In an upcoming release, I would like to see more additional concept for exception handling, batch processing, and increased integration with other application.""It would be great to see implementing security modules as a feature.""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.""Community editions need more attention.""There are some issues with both stability and scalability.""There are limitations with the subscription model that comes with the product."

More Mule ESB Cons »

"Our clients would like to see the user interface improved so that it is more user-friendly.""Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible.""I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process.""It might help if, in the documentation, there were a comments section or some kind of community input. I might read a page of documentation and not fully understand everything, or it might not quite answer the question I had. If there were a section associated with it where people could discuss the same topic, that might be helpful because somebody else might have already asked the question that I had."

More Red Hat Fuse Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"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."

More Mule ESB Pricing and Cost Advice »

"After doing some Googling and comparisons, the main standouts were MuleSoft and Red Hat Fuse. One of the big factors in our decision to go with Fuse was the licensing cost. It was cheaper to go with Fuse.""This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."

More Red Hat Fuse Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
552,305 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: I was previously part of the Oracle SOA/OSB development team. In my current capacity I architected solutions using MuleSoft Anypoint Platform on cloud / on-premises and hybrid modes and on PCE/RTF on… more »
Top Answer: Our team ran a comparison of IBM’s Integration Bus vs. Mule ESB in order to determine what sort of ESB software was the best fit for our organization. Ultimately we decided to choose IBM Integration… more »
Top Answer: The solution has a good graphical interface.
Top Answer: The installation is quite okay. We don't really change much in the configuration. Most of the time, most of the settings remain with the default and we are able to handle our needs using the default… more »
Top Answer: In terms of price, it depends on the package the client signs.
Top Answer: Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible.
Ranking
Views
18,904
Comparisons
14,251
Reviews
9
Average Words per Review
404
Rating
7.6
Views
6,502
Comparisons
4,090
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
566
Rating
7.7
Comparisons
Also Known As
Fuse ESB, FuseSource
Learn More
Overview
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.

Red Hat JBoss Fuse is a lightweight, flexible integration platform that enables rapid integration across the extended enterprise - on-premise or in the cloud. JBoss Fuse includes modular integration capabilities, an enterprise service bus (ESB), to unlock information.

Offer
Learn more about Mule ESB
Learn more about Red Hat Fuse
Sample Customers
Ube, PacificComp, University of Witwatersrand, Justice Systems, Camelot
Avianca, American Product Distributors (APD), Kings College Hospital, AMD, CenturyLink, AECOM, E*TRADE
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm43%
Computer Software Company14%
Healthcare Company14%
Manufacturing Company14%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company35%
Comms Service Provider15%
Financial Services Firm7%
Energy/Utilities Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company36%
Comms Service Provider22%
Financial Services Firm7%
Government5%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business39%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise50%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business28%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise63%
REVIEWERS
Small Business22%
Midsize Enterprise22%
Large Enterprise56%
Find out what your peers are saying about Mule ESB vs. Red Hat Fuse and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
552,305 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Mule ESB is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 9 reviews while Red Hat Fuse is ranked 7th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 4 reviews. Mule ESB is rated 7.6, while Red Hat Fuse is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Mule ESB writes "Well performing and easy to use solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Fuse writes "Containerization adds to the flexibility and power of the solution". Mule ESB is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus, Oracle Service Bus and Mule Anypoint Platform, whereas Red Hat Fuse is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, Oracle Service Bus, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus and webMethods Integration Server. See our Mule ESB vs. Red Hat Fuse report.

See our list of best Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) vendors.

We monitor all Enterprise Service Bus (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.