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

"ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick."
"Most people or many people recommended using ActiveMQ on small and medium-scale applications."
"The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"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."
"It’s a JMS broker, so the fact that it can allow for asynchronous communication is valuable."
"The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"Mule Anypoint Platform is our preferred platform for integration."
"It reduces manual loads in maintaining servers as it comes with the Cloud Hub feature."
"Initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment is a cakewalk."
"The flexibility has been great overall."
"MuleSoft offers with the Anypoint Platform a unified platform for API management and an integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) as well as an on-premise Enterprise Service Bus pattern."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"The integration potential is excellent."
"The most valuable feature of Anypoint MQ is it comes with MuleSoft so we don't have to maintain separate components."
 

Cons

"It would be great if it is included as part of the solution, as Kafka is doing. Even though the use case of Kafka is different, If something like data extraction is possible, or if we can experiment with partition tolerance and other such things, that will be great."
"This solution could improve by providing better documentation."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"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."
"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 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."
"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."
"Price-wise, it is a good product since it is reasonably priced...Mule Anypoint Platform can get too complex for non-technical people."
"The inclusion of GenAI in the tool can be good since it is an area that is currently unavailable in the solution."
"Mule should have better B2B integration."
"Better documentation, in particular with respect to the initial setup, would be helpful."
"One area we'd like to see improvement in is the error logging and troubleshooting process."
"Mule Anypoint Platform could improve by having more up-to-date adapters to do work in a digital space."
"The high price of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The initial setup should be made easy and the documentation should have some guidance."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It’s open source, ergo free."
"There are no fees because it is open-source."
"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."
"ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."
"We use the open-source version."
"The solution is less expensive than its competitors."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."
"I think the software is free."
"Regarding pricing, I believe there could be room for improvement to align with user expectations."
"The solution has a high price."
"Mule is not the cheapest integration platform out there, but it deserves the price we are paying."
"The tool's pricing is cheaper than other RPAs' since it is execution-based. Other RPAs charge based on subscriptions."
"Price-wise, it is a good product since it is reasonably priced."
"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."
"Mule Anypoint Platform pricing is slightly higher compared to Dell Boomi."
"The solution's pricing, as per the old approach, is expensive."
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.