We performed a comparison between IBM Integration Bus and Mule ESB based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Both solutions receive high marks from reviewers. IBM Integration Bus has a slight advantage over Mule ESB due to its flexibility and user-friendly interface.
"One of the most valuable features is how seamless and easy to use this solution is. This is a fantastic solution and a very measured product."
"The most valuable feature is that it is clear and easy to learn."
"I am into microservices using Java Spring Boot, but if we are using legacy systems, IBM Integration Bus is very good for them. They have their own computational logic called EC12, their own proprietary language. You can do any kind of complex logic and can implement other ESVs that I have seen."
"The product is a user-customized tool so that you can adjust it to your specific needs pretty well with little trouble."
"It is very straightforward. It is very user-friendly integration."
"We can have multiple endpoints, and we can integrate different applications from different platforms. In a large-scale enterprise setup, it becomes so easy to establish communication between applications. You can connect an application to other applications, other legacy applications, and databases. You can also connect with those applications that are in the cloud. You can connect with other well-known applications, such as Salesforce, SAP, and Workday, by using IBM Integration Bus."
"The product is usually very easy to deploy."
"One of the most valuable features is App Connect Enterprise makes it possible to deploy it in the OpenShift cluster, which is very good. Overall the solution is very flexible."
"I like that it's user-friendly. Compared to other ESBs, I find it easier to use. I like it better than other ESBs. I like the connectors, which make calling the APIs through the routers easier."
"I'm not using ESB directly. It is the integration layer, so it's running under the hood. However, the conversion and transformation performance is excellent. Anypoint Enterprise Security is also solid."
"Once it is started, we don't see any problems on a day to day basis."
"The solution offers multiple deployment options."
"The connectivity the solution provides is excellent. There are often too many systems that we have to integrate and this helps with that."
"The most valuable feature is the Salesforce integration."
"The most valuable feature for Mule is the number of connectors that are available."
"The architecture based on events has several connectors which allow integration from external and internal applications of the company."
"IBM doesn't really have a very strong community surrounding the product. Most of its direct competitors are open source solutions, and those have an excellent and well-developed community around the tech to help users navigate the ins and outs of the product. IBM is lacking in this area."
"IBM Integration Bus could be easier to manage, but this is true of all vendors. It doesn't always do what it says on the box."
"The version of the technology and current knowledge is a bit outdated."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"Migrating to this solution is complex and it would be helpful if they had a way to convert existing integrations."
"The cloud deployment of the IBM Integration Bus should be made easier."
"Sometimes migration takes too long."
"I think security should be more simplified."
"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."
"It would be great to see implementing security modules as a feature."
"The solution's setup needs to be a bit more straightforward and its support needs to respond faster."
"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."
"It would be much more beneficial if the solution included AI and business process management."
"Mule ESB isn't as secure as IBM. Financial companies go with IBM for that reason."
"Limitation on external subscribers to listen to the messages on the bus."
"In order to meet the new trend of active metadata management, we need intelligent APIs that can retrieve new data designs and trigger actions over new findings without human intervention."
IBM Integration Bus is ranked 1st in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 64 reviews while Mule ESB is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 46 reviews. IBM Integration Bus is rated 8.0, while Mule ESB is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Integration Bus writes "Scalable solution with efficient integration features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mule ESB writes "Plenty of documentation, flexible, and reliable". IBM Integration Bus is most compared with webMethods Integration Server, IBM WebSphere Message Broker, Oracle Service Bus, IBM DataPower Gateway and Red Hat Fuse, whereas Mule ESB is most compared with Oracle Service Bus, Oracle SOA Suite, webMethods Integration Server, Red Hat Fuse and IBM DataPower Gateway. See our IBM Integration Bus vs. Mule ESB 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.