Avada Software Infrared360 vs IBM MQ comparison

Avada Software and IBM are both solutions in the Business Activity Monitoring category. Avada Software is ranked #5, while IBM is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.5. Avada Software holds a 8.4% mindshare in BAM, compared to IBM’s 42.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Avada Software users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of IBM users who would recommend it.

Avada Software Infrared360

Read 13 Avada Software Infrared360 reviews

183 Views
91 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM MQ

Read 164 IBM MQ reviews

765 Views
507 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Avada Software Infrared360

IBM MQ

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Avada Software Infrared360 and IBM MQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Business Activity Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Avada Software Infrared360 vs. IBM MQ Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Avada Software Infrared360 vs. IBM MQ

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,040 peers since 2012

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

Avada Software Infrared360

Ranking in Business Activity Monitoring

5th

Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)

11th

Average Rating

8.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (77th), Server Monitoring (36th)

IBM MQ

Ranking in Business Activity Monitoring

1st

Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)

1st

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

164

Ranking in other categories

Message Queue (MQ) Software (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Business Activity Monitoring category, the mindshare of Avada Software Infrared360 is 8.4%, up from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM MQ is 42.8%, up from 42.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Business Activity Monitoring

Featured Reviews

it_user685326

Vice President at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

An offsite team performs a daily infrastructure health check and sends reports to the technical/management teams.

Administration, Monitoring, and Delegation are the most valuable features of the solution. * Administration: It provides a centralized audit trail of all the infrastructure changes. * Monitoring: It gives the ability to integrate with my company's global notification system, and the ability to proactively automate corrective actions. * Delegation: It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams.

Read full review

SelvaKumar4

System Analyst at Walmart

Offers the ability to batch metadata transfers between systems that support MQ as the communication method

We find it scalable for internal applications, but not so much for external integrations. It should support a wider range of protocols, not just a few specific ones. Many other products have broader protocol support, and IBM MQ is lagging in that area. IBM MQ needs to improve the UI for quicker logging. Users should also have a lot more control over logging, with a dashboard-like interface. That's something they should definitely work on.

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

"It's what we use for monitoring our MQ system, so the features that they provide are just really, really good."

"We have easily created use case testing harnesses for specific flows that incorporate various message types."

"Monitoring that ties into our incident management system"

"It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."

"The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."

"It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams."

"Secure, safe, and very fast."

"It is useful for exchanging information between applications."

"The most valuable feature is the stability. It's perfect in this way."

"Currently, we are not using many advanced features. We are only using point-to-point MQ. I have previously used features like context-based authentication, SSL authentication, and high availability. These are good and pretty cool features. They make your business reliable. For critical business needs, everyone uses only IBM MQ. It is the first choice because of its reliability. There is a one-send-and-one-delivery feature. It also has a no-message-loss feature, and because of that, only IBM MQ is used in banking or financial sectors."

"The most valuable features are RDQM and queue sharing."

"I have found the solution to be very robust. It has a strong reputation, easy to use, simple to configure in our enterprise software, and supports all the protocols that we use."

"Reliable messaging and throughput are the most valuable."

"The methodology and the way in which the platform has been produced as a standard is most valuable. There are so many different versions of it now, but the actual basic functionality and the simplicity of it have made it far easier to be implemented in so many different instances. When I worked with the OS/2 or PS/2 machine environment, the messaging mechanisms were based upon IBM MQ. It is so versatile, which is the main reason that I'm a fan of it."

More IBM MQ pros

Cons

"Some of the graphics in the interface could be improved. It's pretty basic. Some interfaces are not up to what you're used to seeing on other, more Windows-like tools."

"We are still working with the FTE/MFT subscription monitoring and reporting functionality. That is an area in which we would like to see further development taking place."

"One area where they could improve is with their documentation. Some sections are not up to date with new release information and providing additional samples in some areas would be very helpful."

"We desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."

"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."

"The UI can be cumbersome - but we are still using the Viper interface and we have not had the time to check out the Alloy interface which is supposed to be much improved."

"What could be improved is the high-availability. The way MQ works is that it separates the high-availability from the workload balance. The scalability should be easier. If something happens so that the messages are not available on each node, scalability is only possible for the workload balance."

"While there is support for API, it's not like the modern API capabilities."

"There could be a better front-end GUI interface for us, where we can see things more easily."

"There are things within the actual product itself that can be improved, such as limitations on message length, size, etc. There is no standardized message length outside of IBM. Each of the implementations of the MQ series or support of that functionality varies between various suppliers, and because of that, it is very difficult to move from one to the other. We have IBM MQ, but we couldn't use it because the platform that was speaking to MQ didn't support the message length that was standard within IBM MQ. So, we had to use a different product to do exactly the same thing. So, perhaps, there could be more flexibility in the standards around the message queue. If we had been able to increase the message queue size within the IBM MQ implementation, we wouldn't have had to go over to another competing product because the system that was using MQ messaging required the ability to hold messages that were far larger than the IBM MQ standard. So, there could be a bit more flexibility in the structuring. It has as such nothing to do with the IBM implementation of MQ. It is just that the standard that is being put out onto the market doesn't actually stipulate those types of things."

"I would like to see message duplication included."

"SonicMQ CAA (continuous availability architecture) functionality on auto failover and data persistence should be made available without a shared drive, as it exists in multi-instance queue managers."

"The tool is expensive."

"IBM HQ's scalability isn't the best."

More IBM MQ cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Because the licensing is at the QMGR level, you need to have at least a small cushion of licenses for occasional enterprise needs."

"Avada Software's licensing metric is very good because the license fees are based on the number of connections (which have not increased for us very much over the years) rather than the CPU processing power (which increases significantly whenever our hardware is upgraded) or the number of users (which has increased for us a lot since our original purchase)."

"Start small, then increase licensing later as per your demand."

"Our internal budget calculation model incorporates the pricing per endpoint for any new projects. However, as our footprint for distributed queue managers shrinks as part of our shared middleware hub deployment, the initial licensing and support costs have been reduced over the last five years."

"It would be a 10 out of 10 if it wasn't so expensive."

"I rate the product price a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."

"To implement such an IBM solution, a company has to pay a lot in term of licensing and consultancy. A pricing model might be a better option."

"Our costs haven't increased but they also have not improved."

"IBM products, in general, have high licensing costs and support costs are too high."

"There is a different platform price between Windows, z/OS, and iSeries."

"Pricing could be better, as with all IBM products. But their performance in production, along with security and scalability, will pay returns in the long run."

"It's a very expensive product."

More IBM MQ pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Activity Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

39%

Manufacturing Company

University

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

38%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is MQ software?

Hi As someone with 45+ years of experience in the Transaction and Message Processing world, I have seen many "MQ" solutions that have come into the market place. From my perspective, while each pro...

See all answers

What are the differences between Apache Kafka and IBM MQ?

Apache Kafka is open source and can be used for free. It has very good log management and has a way to store the data used for analytics. Apache Kafka is very good if you have a high number of user...

See all answers

How does IBM MQ compare with VMware RabbitMQ?

IBM MQ has a great reputation behind it, and this solution is very robust with great stability. It is easy to use, simple to configure and integrates well with our enterprise ecosystem and protocol...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dynatrace vs Avada Software Infrared360

Compared 31% of the time

More Avada Software Infrared360 Competitors

ActiveMQ vs IBM MQ

Compared 44% of the time

Apache Kafka vs IBM MQ

Compared 9% of the time

Red Hat AMQ vs IBM MQ

Compared 8% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs IBM MQ

Compared 8% of the time

Amazon SNS vs IBM MQ

Compared 1% of the time

More IBM MQ Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Avada Software Infrared360

March 2025

Download Avada Software Infrared360 product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM MQ

March 2025

Download IBM MQ product report

Also Known As

Infrared360

WebSphere MQ

Overview

Avada Software specializes in Enterprise Middleware solutions. Founded by some pioneers in SOA, MQ and J2EE technology, Avada’s Flagship product, Infrared360, is a holistic & innovative private cloud enabled portal providing self-service administration, monitoring, load testing, auditing & statistical reporting for Enterprise Middleware including IBM’s middleware stack of MQ, IIB (message broker), WAS, and Datapower, as well as other applications servers such as JBoss, TC Server, Weblogic, and other messaging technologies such as Tibco EMS and Kafka*.

Accessed via any web browser on any device, Infrared360 is a single web application, yet scales to 2500+ endpoints without deploying anything (no agents, no scripts) to those endpoints.

Using trusted ‘spaces’ and delegated visibility and control, the portal uniquely provides different business units or even different application users virtual ‘spaces’ in which to work. Within those spaces are only the objects and resources the user has been granted visibility. Role policy dictates permissions on those resources.

It is the ONLY Enterprise Messaging Solution with a built in SOA engine that lets you leverage internal and external services for managing and correcting problems within your middleware messaging environment.

*Kafka coming soon

Avada Software

IBM MQ is a middleware product used to send or exchange messages across multiple platforms, including applications, systems, files, and services via MQs (messaging queues). This solution helps simplify the creation of business applications, and also makes them easier to maintain. IBM MQ is security-rich, has high performance, and provides a universal messaging backbone with robust connectivity. In addition, it also integrates easily with existing IT assets by using an SOA (service oriented architecture).

IBM MQ can be deployed:

On-premises
In the cloud
Hybrid cloud

IBM MQ supports the following APIs:

MQI (Message Queue Interface)
REST
.NET
MQTT
JMS
IBM MQ Light

IBM MQ Features

Some of the most powerful IBM MQ features include:

High availability
Stability and scalability
Flexible deployment options
Uniform clusters
Automated and intelligent workload balancing
Broad language, API, and messaging protocol support
Administrative features that simplify messaging management
Open standards development tools
Simple management tools

IBM MQ Benefits

Some of the benefits of using IBM MQ include:

Multi-style messaging: IBM MQ supports simple multi-style messaging, making it easy to connect diverse systems with support for message queuing, transactions, and more.
Reduced risk: With IBM MQ you will never lose a message, and messages are never delivered more than once.
Cloud-native: Because IBM MQ has a minimal infrastructure, it is suitable to be cloud-native, and therefore has the capability to always remain on.
Available anywhere: Using IBM MQ, you have access to secure messaging anywhere, at any time.
Secure: IBM MQ makes sure to keep your data safe by using TLS secured communications, providing access identity management, message-level security, and more measures to protect your information.
Easy for application programmers: To use IBM MQ, application programmers do not need to have any knowledge of communications programming.
Technical support: IBM MQ has a large user community and also provides support 24/7 as needed.

Reviews from Real Users

Below are some reviews and helpful feedback written by IBM MQ users who are currently using the solution.

PeerSpot user Sunil S., a manager at a financial services firm, explains that they never lose messages are never lost in transit, mentioning that he can store messages and forward them as required: "Whenever payments are happening, such as incoming payments to the bank, we need to notify the customer. With MQ we can actually do that asynchronously. We don't want to notify the customer for each and every payment but, rather, more like once a day. That kind of thing can be enabled with the help of MQ."

Another PeerSpot reviewer, Luis L. who is a solutions director at Thesys Technologies, says that IBM MQ is a valuable solution and is "A stable and reliable software that offers good integration between different systems."

The head of operations at a financial services firm notes that "I have found the solution to be very robust. It has a strong reputation, is easy to use, simple to configure in our enterprise software, and supports all the protocols that we use."

In addition, a Software Engineer at a financial services firm praises the security benefits of it and states that “it has the most security features I've seen in a communication solution. Security is the most important thing for our purposes."

IBM

Sample Customers

USBank, Southwest Airlines, Visiting Nurse Services of New York, Aon Hewitt, Parker Hannifin, Cantonal Bank of Zurich (ZKB), Hagemeyer NA, and many others

Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation

Buyer's Guide

Avada Software Infrared360 vs. IBM MQ

March 2025

Free Report: Avada Software Infrared360 vs. IBM MQ

Find out what your peers are saying about Avada Software Infrared360 vs. IBM MQ and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Avada Software Infrared360 vs. IBM MQ report.

See our list of best Business Activity Monitoring vendors and best Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) vendors.

We monitor all Business Activity Monitoring 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.