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

Aurea CX Messenger vs Mule ESB comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Aurea CX Messenger
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
12th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (3rd), Message Queue (MQ) Software (9th), SOA Governance (3rd), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (7th)
Mule ESB
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 0.8%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Mule ESB is 25.2%, up from 24.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

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…
PurbayanSaha - PeerSpot reviewer
Has API-led architecture and provides a unique, user-friendly, and scalable architecture for hosting APIs
There's room for improvement in multi-file transfer functionality. It's not convenient when using MuleSoft, and it should have better capability for handling large amounts of data. For example, applications like GoAnywhere can handle huge chunks of data, so the tool should also have something to facilitate that aspect of integration.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"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."
"The connectivity the solution provides is excellent. There are often too many systems that we have to integrate and this helps with that."
"I like that Mule ESB provides fast and good technical support."
"Mule ESB has a user-friendly design, and everything is in one place. The API and architecture are popular right now. Also, MuleSoft has a large and supportive online community."
"Once it is started, we don't see any problems on a day to day basis."
"It's open source, and there are a lot of community resources. Mule ESB makes it easy to connect to other software applications."
"Mule Expression Language"
"The most powerful feature is DataWeave, which is a powerful language where data can be transformed from one form into another."
"We can use Java expressions anywhere in the flow."
 

Cons

"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."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"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."
"There are limitations with the subscription model that comes with the product."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"The Anypoint platform consumes a lot of memory, and it would be great for developers if it were more lightweight."
"Community editions need more attention."
"MuleSoft is not so strong in method-based integration, so they're not so functional in that regard."
"Mule ESB isn't as secure as IBM. Financial companies go with IBM for that reason."
"There are some issues with both stability and scalability."
"It would be great to see implementing security modules as a feature."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."
"You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscription"
"The pricing is not so high."
"I think the price is very high. If you use TIBCO BW, the license is for the CPU usage, then the IPS, and support. I also think the license for the product is a one-time expense."
"The licensing is yearly, and there are additional fees for services."
"Most of the challenges that I had with this solution were for smaller customers. There is not a good licensing model or pricing model. It is more expensive than other solutions, and that's the downside of MuleSoft. I had to be creative to be able to sell it to the business, but we did. This is something they have to work on because for large companies, it's affordable, but for small and medium businesses, it's very hard to sell."
"This product is expensive, but it does offer value for money."
"Plan your licensing model (cloud or on-premises or hybrid) that will allow seamless integration with new partners."
"Mule ESB is an expensive solution."
"This is expensive. In my next project, we had to go to other vendor."
"The pricing must be improved."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Insurance Company
7%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
Migration from IBM Integration Bus to Mulesoft ESB for a large enterprise tech services company
I was previously part of the Oracle SOA/OSB development team. In my current capacity I architected solutions using MuleSoft Anypoint Platform on cloud / on-premises and hybrid modes and on PCE/RTF ...
IBM Integration Bus vs Mule ESB - which to choose?
Our team ran a comparison of IBM’s Integration Bus vs. Mule ESB in order to determine what sort of ESB software was the best fit for our organization. Ultimately we decided to choose IBM Integratio...
What do you like most about Mule ESB?
The solution's drag-and-drop interface and data viewer helped us quite a lot.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

CX Messenger Enterprise, Aurea Sonic ESB, Aurea Sonic, Aurea Sonic MQ
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom Mortgage
Ube, PacificComp, University of Witwatersrand, Justice Systems, Camelot
Find out what your peers are saying about Aurea CX Messenger vs. Mule ESB and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.