Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

ActiveMQ vs Aurea CX Messenger comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

ActiveMQ
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Aurea CX Messenger
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
9th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (3rd), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (12th), SOA Governance (3rd), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (7th)
 

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 Aurea CX Messenger is 0.4%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Eyob Alemu - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Radhey Rajput - PeerSpot reviewer
Lightweight and efficient solution
It's very good and lightweight. But, it does not provide web service communication. But it is excellent for internal connections One valuable feature is the messaging broker. If there is a disruption, it restores the messages. And when the application is running, it delivers all the messages. The…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I appreciate many features including queue, topic, durable topic, and selectors. I also value a different support for different protocols such as MQTT and AMQP. It has full support for EIP, REST, Message Groups, UDP, and TCP."
"For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery."
"ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick."
"Most people or many people recommended using ActiveMQ on small and medium-scale applications."
"ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."
"Reliable message delivery and mirroring."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"Message broadcasting: There could be a use case sending the same message to all consumers. So as a producer, I broadcast the message to a topic. Then, whichever consumers are subscribed to the topic can consume the same message."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."
"The solution offers excellent stability."
"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."
 

Cons

"There are some stability issues."
"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."
"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"For additional functionality, I suggest making it easier to install and monitor the queues, topics, broker status, publisher status, and consumer status. Improved monitoring tools would help avoid needing to manually access the server for monitoring purposes."
"This solution could improve by providing better documentation."
"One potential area would be the complexity of the initial setup."
"The UI. It's both a good thing and a bad thing. The UI is too simple. Sometimes you wanna see the messages coming to the queue, and you have to refresh the dashboard, the console of the product."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are using the open-source version, so we have not looked at any pricing."
"The solution is less expensive than its competitors."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."
"There are no fees because it is open-source."
"ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."
"It’s open source, ergo free."
"We use the open-source version."
"I think the software is free."
"You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscription"
"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."
"The pricing is not so high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Insurance Company
7%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
 

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.
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...
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 ...
What do you like most about Aurea CX Messenger?
The Messenger Broker is a really good feature.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Aurea CX Messenger?
The pricing is not so high. I will rate it a seven out of ten, where one is the lowest and ten is the highest. There are no additional fees to the standard license.
What needs improvement with Aurea CX Messenger?
The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services because the earlier version is not using web service and cloud functionality. If Aurea could include these features in the fut...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

AMQ
CX Messenger Enterprise, Aurea Sonic ESB, Aurea Sonic, Aurea Sonic MQ
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc. 
Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom Mortgage
Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveMQ vs. Aurea CX Messenger and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.