We performed a comparison between IBM WebSphere Message Broker and Mule ESB based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has many interfaces and you can connect to any backend source that has another format, and convert it to the desired format."
"Message Broker is valuable because most of the applications are using MQ. Even in my current engagement, the few applications which I audit to onboard the bank are using MQ."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"It is a scalable solution...The setup is easy."
"Performance-wise, this solution is really good."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"I like that Mule ESB provides fast and good technical support."
"We can use Java expressions anywhere in the flow."
"The most valuable feature for Mule is the number of connectors that are available."
"The most powerful feature is DataWeave, which is a powerful language where data can be transformed from one form into another."
"The solution has a good graphical interface."
"The connectivity the solution provides is excellent. There are often too many systems that we have to integrate and this helps with that."
"Mule Expression Language"
"What Mule provides out-of-box is a sufficient product."
"The installation configuration is quite difficult."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
"Technical support is very slow and needs to be improved."
"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."
"The images and size of the containers are too big and I think that they should be more lightweight."
"Today I probably wouldn't go for Message Broker because of the cost structure, support, and the whole ecosystem around IBM."
"There is some lag in the GUI. There have been some performance issues and maybe it's because of the application data."
"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."
"We would like to have a built-in logging framework in which we can do auditing."
"From an improvement perspective, there should be fewer coding challenges for users in Mule ESB."
"The price of Mule ESB could improve."
"It needs more samples. Also, the dependency on Maven should be removed."
"Mule ESB could be more user-friendly. I think users must learn about the architecture before they start coding. The price could be better. In the next release, I would like to see an EDIFACT integration."
"Documentation is cryptic, product releases are far too frequent, and upgrades become troublesome."
"It would be great to see implementing security modules as a feature."
IBM WebSphere Message Broker is ranked 8th in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 11 reviews while Mule ESB is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 46 reviews. IBM WebSphere Message Broker is rated 7.8, while Mule ESB is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM WebSphere Message Broker writes "For new applications that are being onboarded, we engage this tool so the data can flow as required but there's some lag in the GUI". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mule ESB writes "Plenty of documentation, flexible, and reliable". IBM WebSphere Message Broker is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, webMethods Integration Server, IBM DataPower Gateway, IBM BPM and Red Hat Fuse, whereas Mule ESB is most compared with IBM Integration Bus, Oracle Service Bus, Oracle SOA Suite, webMethods Integration Server and JBoss ESB. See our IBM WebSphere Message Broker 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.
