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

Avada Software Infrared360 vs IBM MQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

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
13
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (75th), Server Monitoring (33rd)
IBM MQ
Ranking in Business Activity Monitoring
1st
Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
161
Ranking in other categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Business Activity Monitoring category, the mindshare of Avada Software Infrared360 is 8.0%, up from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM MQ is 40.0%, down from 43.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Activity Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

it_user685326 - PeerSpot reviewer
Jun 15, 2017
An offsite team performs a daily infrastructure health check and sends reports to the technical/management teams.
An offsite team performs a daily infrastructure health check using Infrared360 and sends reports to the technical/management teams. This fulfills an important security requirement within our organization Administration, Monitoring, and Delegation are the most valuable features of the solution.…
SelvaKumar4 - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 22, 2024
Offers the ability to batch metadata transfers between systems that support MQ as the communication method
I use MQ MFT for asynchronous communication – file and message transfers. I also frequently use IBM MQ for its queuing mechanisms and queue management IBM MQ is good for system integration within our organization.  If we need to do batch metadata transfers – involving APIs and MQ – we can do that…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."
"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."
"It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."
"Monitoring that ties into our incident management system"
"It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams."
"It's ability to scale, it's ability to do guaranteed delivery and it's ability to do point-to-point of what we subscribe are the most valuable features."
"Clustering is one of its most valuable features."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"I like the architecture it provides seamlessly for assured delivery."
"The feature I find most effective for ensuring message delivery without loss is the backup threshold. This feature allows for automatic retries of transactional messages within a specified threshold."
"Overall the solution operates well and has good integration."
"IBM MQ is the right choice because of the stability and the performance. And from the support perspective, it's enough to have a really small team."
"It's highly scalable. It provides various ways to establish high availability and workloads. E.g., you can spread workloads inside of your clusters."
 

Cons

"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"We desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing needs improvement."
"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."
"They could integrate monitoring into the solution, a bit more than they do now. Currently, they have opened the REST API so you can get statistic and accounting information and details from MQ and build your own monitoring, if you want. IBM can improve the solution in this direction."
"The tool is expensive."
"It could always be more stable and secure."
"I couldn't find a lot of information on the system API side."
"MQ needs instruments for connection with new modern queues like Kafka or RabbitMQ."
"The main issue we are having with the solution is due to the connection dropouts which have been going on for a long time now."
 

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."
"Start small, then increase licensing later as per your demand."
"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)."
"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."
"The price of IBM MQ could improve by being less expensive."
"IBM MQ has a flexible license model based on the Processor Value Unit (PVU) and I recommend it."
"It's a very expensive product."
"We have a special contract with IBM MQ that give us a certain price."
"I rate the product price a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"Our costs haven't increased but they also have not improved."
"99.999 percent availability for less than a penny per message over the past 25 years. IBM MQ is the cheapest software in the IBM software portfolio, and it is one of the best."
"Licensing for this software is on a yearly basis. The standard fee includes the maintenance and updates that are released periodically."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Activity Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
38%
Insurance Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
38%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Government
4%
 

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...
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...
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...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

Infrared360
WebSphere MQ
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about Avada Software Infrared360 vs. IBM MQ and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.