We performed a comparison between Amazon MQ and Apache Kafka based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial Amazon MQ setup is very easy both when you do it on your own or use the self-managed instance."
"Amazon MQ is a very scalable solution."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its managed service aspect. It's simple to implement and use. It requires minimal effort to maintain business operations."
"valuable features relate to microservices architecture and working on KStream and KSQL DB as a microservices event bus."
"This is a system for email and other small devices. There has been a relay of transactions continuously over the last two years it has been in production."
"Kafka is scalable. It can manage a high volume of data from many sources."
"A great streaming platform."
"We get amazing throughput. We don't get any delay."
"Apache Kafka's most valuable features include clustering and sharding...It is a pretty stable solution."
"The open-source version is relatively straightforward to set up and only takes a few minutes."
"Kafka, as compared with other messaging system options, is great for large scale message processing applications. It offers high throughput with built-in fault-tolerance and replication."
"The product should improve its monitoring capabilities. It needs to improve the pricing also."
"Amazon MQ is a good solution for small and medium-sized enterprises. It's open-source software, which means it's cheaper than its competitors."
"Depending on your use cases, Amazon MQ can be cheap or expensive."
"We struggled a bit with the built-in data transformations because it was a challenge to get them up and running the way we wanted."
"The product is good, but it needs implementation and on-going support. The whole cloud engagement model has made the adoption of Kafka better due to PaaS (Amazon Kinesis, a fully managed service by AWS)."
"The solution could always add a few more features to enhance its usage."
"Lacks elasticity and the ability to scale down."
"The UI is based on command line. It would be helpful if they could come up with a simpler user interface."
"Pulsar gives more scalability to an even grouping, but Apache Kafka is used more if you want to send something in a time series-based. If this does not matter to you then Pulsar could be more customizable. Apache Kafka is nothing but a streaming system with local storage."
"The user interface is one weakness. Sometimes, our data isn't as accessible as we'd like. It takes a lot of work to retrieve the data and the index."
"We cannot apply all of our security requirements because it is hard to upload them."
Amazon MQ is ranked 9th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 3 reviews while Apache Kafka is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 78 reviews. Amazon MQ is rated 8.4, while Apache Kafka is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Amazon MQ writes "Provides you with a URL where you can either send or retrieve messages". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Real-time processing and reliable for data integrity". Amazon MQ is most compared with Amazon SQS, VMware Tanzu Data Services, IBM MQ, Red Hat AMQ and EMQX, whereas Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ, Anypoint MQ and Oracle Data Integrator (ODI). See our Amazon MQ vs. Apache Kafka report.
See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.
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.