ActiveMQ vs Amazon SQS comparison

Apache and Amazon Web Services (AWS) are both solutions in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category. Apache is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.5, while Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.7. Apache holds a 30.9% mindshare in MQ, compared to Amazon Web Services (AWS)’s 12.3% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Apache users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 92% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users who would recommend it.

ActiveMQ

Read 26 ActiveMQ reviews

8,673 Views
5,099 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Amazon SQS

Read 26 Amazon SQS reviews

3,094 Views
2,611 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

ActiveMQ

Amazon SQS

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between ActiveMQ and Amazon SQS 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.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveMQ vs. Amazon SQS Report (Updated: October 2024).

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ vs. Amazon SQS

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 816,192 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

ActiveMQ

Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

5.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Amazon SQS

Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software

4th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of ActiveMQ is 30.9%, up from 24.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Amazon SQS is 12.3%, down from 19.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Message Queue (MQ) Software

Featured Reviews

Eyob Alemu

Technical Director at NIDP

Efficient data flow management with high performance and occasional stability improvements

For high traffic volumes where management time on ActiveMQ is minimal and where the rate of flow from the provider is slower than from the consumer, ActiveMQ offers the highest performance based on our experience. It has been efficient for data flow control between two endpoints, despite occasional unexpected glitches. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Read full review

Aravind Nithiyanandham

Senior Site Reliability Engineer at Optum

Used for notifying, queuing servers, and queuing messages

I created a support ticket one or two years ago. The technical support team responded promptly and helped us with the issues. I am very much happy with the solution’s technical support. They are knowledgeable, understand our problem easily, and then figure out the issues. On a scale from one to ten, where one is bad and ten is excellent, I rate the solution’s technical support nine and a half out of ten.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."

"There is a vibrant community, and it is one of the strongest points of this product. We always get answers to our problems. So, my experience with the community support has been good."

"ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick."

"It provides the best support services."

"We value ActiveMQ for its performance, throughput, and low latency, especially in handling large volumes of data and sequential management of topics."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the holding and forwarding."

"For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery."

"The main function I find valuable in ActiveMQ is facilitating message transfer within the client's internal network. ActiveMQ handles the message transfer from the internal network to the cloud. Regarding multi-protocols, we use different approaches based on client capabilities. Some clients connect for real-time data transfer, using database queries for periodic updates every ten minutes. We collect data from multiple clients, ensuring we get real-time sensor values where possible and periodic updates for others."

More ActiveMQ pros

"SQS is very stable, and it has lots of features."

"I appreciate that Amazon SQS is fully integrated with Amazon and can be accessed through normal functions or serverless functions, making it very user-friendly. Additionally, the features are comparable to those of other solutions."

"The most valuable feature of Amazon SQS is its scalability."

"We use SNS as the publisher, and our procurement service subscribes to those events using SQS. In the past, we relied on time-based or batch-based processes to send data between services on-premises. With SQS, we can trigger actions based on real-time changes in business processes, improving reliability."

"It's very quick and easy to build or set up Amazon SQS."

"All Amazon Web Services resources are easy to configure."

"We use the tool in interface integrations."

"We used SQS for the Kapolei system to ensure that certain tasks were executed precisely once. The first-in, first-out (FIFO) capability was a great feature for us. Additionally, its redundancy out of the box meant we didn't have to worry about missing messages. It provided peace of mind and automatically instilled trust, relieving us of any concerns."

More Amazon SQS pros

Cons

"Distributed message processing would be a nice addition."

"I would rate the stability a five out of ten because sometimes it gets stuck, and we have to restart it. We"

"It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues."

"The solution can improve the other protocols to equal the AMQ protocol they offer."

"The tool needs to improve its installation part which is lengthy. The product is already working on that aspect so that the complete installation gets completed within a month."

"We need to enhance stability and improve the deployment optimization to fully leverage the platform's capabilities."

"The clustering for sure needs improvement. When we were using it, the only thing available was an active/passive relationship that had to be maintained via shared file storage. That model includes a single point of failure in that storage medium."

"From the TPS point of view, it's like 100,000 transactions that need to be admitted from different devices and also from the different minor small systems. Those are best fit for Kafka. We have used it on the customer side, and we thought of giving a try to ActiveMQ, but we have to do a lot of performance tests and approval is required before we can use it for this scale."

More ActiveMQ cons

"Packages sometimes have delays in dropping, indicating reliability issues."

"Improvement is needed in terms of troubleshooting and logs."

"As a company that uses IBM solutions, it's difficult to compare Amazon SQS to other solutions. We have been using IBM solutions for a long time and they are very mature in integration and queuing. In my role as an integration manager, I can say that Amazon SQS is designed primarily for use within the Amazon ecosystem and does not have the same level of functionality as IBM MQ or other similar products. It has limited connectivity options and does not easily integrate with legacy systems."

"The initial setup of Amazon SQS is in the middle range of difficulty. You need to learn Amazon AWS and know how to navigate, create resources, and structures, and provide rules."

"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."

"Support could be improved."

"For Amazon SQS, in particular, I think AWS Management Console has shortcomings. AWS Management Console should be a better pluggable option to help users with some integrations."

"The tool needs improvement in user-friendliness and discoverability."

More Amazon SQS cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It’s open source, ergo free."

"There are no fees because it is open-source."

"We use the open-source version."

"I think the software is free."

"The solution is less expensive than its competitors."

"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."

"We are using the open-source version, so we have not looked at any pricing."

"The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."

More ActiveMQ pricing and cost advice

"Compared to EC2 and other services, Amazon SQS' pricing is cheaper."

"The pricing model is pay-as-you-use. It depends on your usage and configuration."

"It's quite expensive."

"SQS's pricing is very good - I would rate it nine out of ten."

"Amazon SQS is quite expensive and is at the highest price point compared to other solutions."

"Amazon SQS is moderately priced."

"Amazon SQS is more affordable compared to other solutions."

"I rate the tool's pricing a nine out of ten."

More Amazon SQS pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

816,192 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

33%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ActiveMQ?

For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery.

See all answers

What needs improvement with ActiveMQ?

We need to address the non-deterministic load issues. Sometimes, ActiveMQ either restarts automatically or goes into ActiveMQ mode, causing interruptions. We need to enhance stability and improve t...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for ActiveMQ?

We have a digital ID platform that uses various services running on Kafka. There are two main endpoints where services interact with external services. These include an automatic biometric service ...

See all answers

What do you like most about Amazon SQS?

It is stable and scalable.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Amazon SQS?

A feature I would like to see in Amazon SQS is the ability to view the content of messages without removing them from the queue. Enhanced filtering on the messages would be beneficial, as currently...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Amazon SQS?

The most common use case for Amazon SQS is decoupling an application. Instead of having one monolithic service with a timeout of about a minute, and if there are too many requests at the same time ...

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM MQ vs ActiveMQ

Compared 43% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs ActiveMQ

Compared 19% of the time

Red Hat AMQ vs ActiveMQ

Compared 12% of the time

PubSub+ Platform vs ActiveMQ

Compared 5% of the time

Redis vs ActiveMQ

Compared 5% of the time

More ActiveMQ Competitors

Apache Kafka vs Amazon SQS

Compared 27% of the time

Redis vs Amazon SQS

Compared 23% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs Amazon SQS

Compared 14% of the time

Oracle Event Hub Cloud Service vs Amazon SQS

Compared 9% of the time

Amazon MQ vs Amazon SQS

Compared 9% of the time

More Amazon SQS Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ

November 2024

Download ActiveMQ product report

Buyer's Guide

Amazon SQS

November 2024

Download Amazon SQS product report

Also Known As

AMQ

No data available

Learn More

Apache

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Overview

Apache ActiveMQ is the most popular and powerful open source messaging and Integration Patterns server.

Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License

Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS) is a fully managed message queuing service that enables you to decouple and scale microservices, distributed systems, and serverless applications. SQS eliminates the complexity and overhead associated with managing and operating message oriented middleware, and empowers developers to focus on differentiating work. Using SQS, you can send, store, and receive messages between software components at any volume, without losing messages or requiring other services to be available. Get started with SQS in minutes using the AWS console, Command Line Interface or SDK of your choice, and three simple commands.

SQS offers two types of message queues. Standard queues offer maximum throughput, best-effort ordering, and at-least-once delivery. SQS FIFO queues are designed to guarantee that messages are processed exactly once, in the exact order that they are sent.

Sample Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc.

EMS, NASA, BMW, Capital One

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ vs. Amazon SQS

October 2024

Free Report: ActiveMQ vs. Amazon SQS

Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveMQ vs. Amazon SQS and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

816,192 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ActiveMQ vs. Amazon SQS 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.