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.
"The most valuable feature is that it is clear and easy to learn."
"The integration with other tools is excellent. It integrates well with batch issues."
"Facilitates communication between parties and legacy systems."
"IBM Integration Bus is a very strong tool."
"Promotes the reuse of developed resources to more efficiently consume resources."
"We use IBM Integration Bus for document conversions."
"It is a stable solution."
"It's easy to develop things, and it's easy to handle."
"The solution improved my company by modernizing the way we offer services and improving the user experience."
"The product offers a community edition that is free of cost."
"The most valuable feature is the Salesforce integration."
"Everything runs in Java, which is a useful feature."
"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 that it's programmer-friendly, so it's very easy to develop APIs."
"I am impressed with the product's connectors and scalability."
"The architecture based on events has several connectors which allow integration from external and internal applications of the company."
"IBM Integration Bus can improve JSON Schema validations. We don't have any kind of nodes that can support that kind of validation. If we want to containerize it by means of the docker's containers in the clouds, we are not able to manage it very well."
"Its integration with Cloud Pak components could be better."
"Current aggregation implementation should be deprecated. MQ independent, as well as an intuitive solution, should be proposed."
"The password settings need improvement."
"We decided to move away from IBM Integration Bus for IT technical refreshments."
"Its documentation is currently lacking. We have different environments where we use our configuration services, but we are not able to find documentation about how to deploy the local code to the server and how to set it up on a server level. I would like more documents from IBM that explain which variables should be in your machine while building a project, and when you deploy the code into the server, what should be their values. There are some variable values. I could not find such documentation. While working on a project, I developed the code on a local machine, and while deploying the code to our test environment, I made a couple of mistakes. We had to change some values at the server level, but we couldn't find any documentation regarding this, which made the task difficult."
"The price could be better. It would also be better if they simplified the code."
"The solution needs to simplify its documentation, such as the user and operation manuals, to make them even easier to understand."
"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."
"It should have some amount of logging."
"The payment system needs improvement."
"It needs more samples. Also, the dependency on Maven should be removed."
"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's not easy to troubleshoot and we still can't make it work."
"From the product perspective, it was sometimes hard to manage the dependencies. When we had to add dependencies on a couple of different packages, it was sometimes confusing. It was hard to update them with Anypoint Studio, as well as with MuleSoft. There were challenges with that. So, that's one of the areas that could be improved."
IBM Integration Bus is ranked 1st in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) with 65 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, Oracle Service Bus, IBM WebSphere Message Broker, 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.