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

ActiveMQ vs MuleSoft Anypoint Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

ActiveMQ
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (1st), Workload Automation (8th), Cloud Data Integration (4th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of ActiveMQ is 26.5%, up from 21.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MuleSoft Anypoint Platform is 10.0%, up from 10.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Prashant-Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows for asynchronous communication, enabling services to operate independently but issues with stability
The feature of ActiveMQ which I feel is good is its ability to have DLP, the later queues. If something goes wrong with the platform, it retries. Even if it fails, it goes to DLP, and later we can rescan the same event for processing. The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable.
Vijay Subramanyam - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust, reliable, and stable, ensuring high availability for critical integrations
I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten; it is a highly scalable solution. We have around 200 end users using this solution in our company. We use it to its maximum capacity. However, it's not for P1 applications, but definitely for severity two cases (P2 level). It integrates critical applications, but it's not a platform that, if it stops, the entire system would come down. So, it's more like a severity two level. However, it has the potential to eventually become a P1 platform. Not exactly P1 applications, but a P1 platform. Because now we are still in the transition to migrate everything, all the integrations to Mule Anypoint Platform. But once it's done, then this platform becomes critical. Because even now, we have point-to-point connections.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the holding and forwarding."
"ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"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."
"The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable."
"For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery."
"The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."
"Overall, it is a pretty good product. It is also very scalable."
"The exchange and API management features are the best in the market."
"The most valuable feature is the variety of characters Anypoint Platform has. It is very scalable and customizable."
"Mule Anypoint Platform is our preferred platform for integration."
"The most valuable feature is the full lifecycle management, including Anypoint Designer and Exchange, as well as Discofolio API."
"The solution's deployment and proxy processes are very good."
"When we talk about the APIs, there are multiple policies one can apply on APIs, like rate limiting policies, OWASP policies, and OWASP security policies, that can be easily configured in Mule Anypoint Platform."
"The product’s ability to seamlessly translate protocols is great."
 

Cons

"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"The solution can improve the other protocols to equal the AMQ protocol they offer."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."
"It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues."
"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."
"I would like the tool to improve compliance and stability. We will encounter issues while using the central applications. In the solution's future releases, I want to control and set limitations for databases."
"The solution is very costly. The solution should provide a package with fewer capabilities at a lower price for specific companies that don’t have a big IT budget. Not every customer requires all the capabilities of the software. It will be a good fit in the market, and they will easily sell it more."
"It should give better control over account management."
"Mule Anypoint Platform is complex for beginners. Users without programming skills will find it complex. It should also improve its pricing."
"The solution's licensing methodologies could be improved."
"The runtime management and connectors could use some work and are vulnerable to breakage after upgrades."
"MuleSoft is considered one of the more expensive products in the market."
"It would be better if we had a clearer view of the solution's future releases."
"Lacks intelligent management data and intelligent mappings."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the software is free."
"We use the open-source version."
"We are using the open-source version, so we have not looked at any pricing."
"There are no fees because it is open-source."
"ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."
"The solution is less expensive than its competitors."
"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."
"It’s open source, ergo free."
"The tool is heavily bundle-priced. I rate the solution’s pricing five on a scale of ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap."
"MuleSoft Anypoint Platform really needs to work on its pricing model because it's very complicated."
"Mule Anypoint Platform is an expensive solution."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing as four or five out of ten."
"Making changes in Anypoint MQ is expensive."
"The pricing of our solution is highly competitive. While it may not be categorized as exceptionally low, it is certainly more affordable compared to IBM."
"The licensing is core-based. My customers tell me that it's very expensive compared to the cost of other integration suites."
"Price-wise, it is a good product since it is reasonably priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
34%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Educational Organization
24%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

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 advice do you have for others considering Mule Anypoint Platform?
I architected solutions using Oracle SOA/OSB, Spring Boot, MuleSoft Anypoint Platform on cloud / on-premises and hybrid modes; What I see is though if you are an enterprise and have enough money th...
How does TIBCO BusinessWorks compare with Mule Anypoint Platform?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether TIBCO BusinessWorks or Mule Anypoint platform integration and connectivity software was the better fit for us. We decided to go with Mule...
What can Mule Anypoint Platform be used for and what do you use it for most often?
This is a very flexible solution that comes with multiple uses. My organization mostly uses Mule Anypoint Platform for API management, as it lets us build new APIs easily and design new interfaces...
 

Also Known As

AMQ
Data Integrator, Anypoint MQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc. 
VMware, Gucci, MasterCard, Target, Time Inc, Hershey's, Tesla, Spotify, Office Depot, Intuit, CBS, Amtrak, Salesforce, Gap, Ralph Lauren
Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveMQ vs. MuleSoft Anypoint Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
844,944 professionals have used our research since 2012.