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

IBM DataPower Gateway vs Red Hat Fuse comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

IBM DataPower Gateway
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Application Infrastructure (9th), SOA Application Gateways (3rd), API Management (11th)
Red Hat Fuse
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of IBM DataPower Gateway is 6.1%, down from 6.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Fuse is 8.8%, down from 10.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

Mehdi El Filahi - PeerSpot reviewer
Security features meets compliance needs and offers MPGW (Multi-Protocol Gateway) that simplifies integration efforts
While I like IBM products, I'm not an evangelist. I work with Java, Microsoft ASP.NET, and various technologies. I'm not tied to any specific vendor. However, I do find IBM to be a bit greedy. It's a large, profit-driven company. The support team is mostly based in India, and they follow a very structured process and protocol. Sometimes, it feels like playing ping pong with them – lots of back and forth before the problem gets escalated. You might even have to get your sales rep involved to push things along. For me, the support it could be better. Indian support teams aren't inherently bad, but with IBM, it feels impersonal. They respond, sure. But if it's a complex technical issue, they might ask you a lot of questions that just seem designed to waste your time. Sometimes it feels like they hope you'll get frustrated and solve the problem yourself.
Kaushal  Kedia - PeerSpot reviewer
Configurable, doesn't require much coding, and has an automatic load balancing feature, but its development features need improvement
What needs to be improved in Red Hat Fuse is on the development side because when you use it for development purposes, it lacks a user interface compared to what MuleSoft has, so it's a bit difficult for users. There are good and bad points in Red Hat Fuse, but mostly the solution has good points. There's also another similar product in the market: IB Information Builder which is a product that has recently been taken over by TIBCO, and TIBCO has a similar integration product. It's similar to MuleSoft because both TIBCO and MuleSoft have user interfaces on the development side, so if I have to define a route where one particular flow should follow a particular way, for example, service should be consumed from this point, and these are my source and target, I'd be able to do those on MuleSoft and TIBCO more easily, but not in Red Hat Fuse. The development features of Red Hat Fuse need improvement, but I feel the team has done a lot in the latest version, and now Red Hat Fuse will be removed from the market and the focus will be on OpenShift purely. There is also a new product called Red Hat Integration and there will be a movement towards Docker because a major drawback of Red Hat Fuse is that it doesn't have small containers, so every time, you'll need dedicated virtual machines on top of those you're running, but now, it seems Kubernetes will be used. In the past, in the older version of Red Hat Fuse, you have a full container and the whole application is deployed on containers one, two, and three, so you don't have the option of splitting. It's similar to microservices, but now those things are taken care of in the latest version, and the older version of Red Hat Fuse will come to an end. An additional feature I'd like to see in Red Hat Fuse is a direct integration, particularly with CI/CD, which can help reduce overhead because you won't need to have a big DevOps team for building, preparation, and deployment. Dockers and microservices support are also additional features I'd like to see in the solution. More successful deployments will also help make Red Hat Fuse better.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"The solution is scalable, our customers are mostly South African banks and they handle mostly transactions with this solution."
"My company has a good impression of IBM DataPower Gateway. What I like about it is that because it's an appliance, it's a turnkey solution that's very fast and out of the box. Compared to other gateways, I also like that IBM DataPower Gateway is function-rich. For example, for one of the projects, there was a need for specific transformation and security features available in IBM DataPower Gateway out of the box, so my team just needed to configure the appliance. There was no need for separate development, and I found it quite neat. Another valuable feature of IBM DataPower Gateway is that it's easy to integrate with other products."
"The most valuable features for our business include the ability to monitor and log data transactions and handle multiple request at an enterprise level."
"The performance is good. It's been very stable."
"It can look for the various security threats, productions, payload scanning, and perform routing based on the content type."
"The solution is stable."
"Since it is a gateway, it provides a lot of security features."
"This solution's adaptability to our use case has helped us integrate our systems seamlessly."
"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."
"With a premium, one can get support 24 hours."
"One of the features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse is that it has a lot of containers so you won't have to worry about load balancing. In the past, there was a cut-off, but nowadays, Red Hat Fuse is moving off of that, so my team is utilizing it the most for load balancing, particularly running goal applications and three to five containers. There's automatic load balancing so you won't have to worry too much. I also found that component-wise, you don't have to do much coding in Red Hat Fuse because everything is configurable, for example, XML-based coding. Coding isn't that difficult. Performance-wise, I also found the solution to be quite good and its processing is quite fast. My team is processing a huge amount of data with the help of Red Hat Fuse."
"The most valuable feature is that it's the same as Apache Camel."
"The support training that comes with the product is amazing."
"The stability has been good."
"The installation is quite okay. We don't really change much in the configuration. Most of the time, most of the settings remain with the default and we are able to handle our needs using the default setting."
 

Cons

"For the workloads that are not too high, appliance is a little bit expensive."
"The programming language is only supported in XSLT and Gateway script."
"They should add features to manage API integrations."
"Small and medium-sized companies might look for cloud-hosted applications due to the cost."
"In the next release, I would like to see the product price reduced. It should be cheaper."
"It is a costly product."
"Scripting needs improvement. It's hard for our customers."
"The initial setup isn't so easy, you need who has experience working with the solution to help."
"The web tools need to be updated."
"I would like to see more up-to-date documentation and examples from Red Hat Fuse."
"What needs to be improved in Red Hat Fuse is on the development side because when you use it for development purposes, it lacks a user interface compared to what MuleSoft has, so it's a bit difficult for users."
"The stability of the solution is an area with a shortcoming that needs to be improved."
"In the next release, I'd like more stability and more security overall."
"There is definitely a bit of a learning curve."
"The testing part, specifically when running it in the cloud, could be improved. It's a little bit complex, especially considering its cloud nature."
"I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The total cost of IBM DataPower Gateway would depend on the configuration, but in my experience, it can amount to 60,000 Euros per box, even for the virtual version. Usually, customers need high availability and a non-production environment, so the total price for IBM DataPower Gateway can be quite a lot. It can be 200,000 Euros or a similar figure."
"Most customers' use case budgets are not inlined with the price of IBM DataPower Gateway. It is too expensive."
"It's expensive when you compare it with others."
"The product is expensive."
"The solution has a return on investment but is a little expensive."
"The appliance is a bit on the expensive side for the workloads that are not too high."
"This product is a bit expensive as IBM products are costly assets. However, for enterprise customers it is a worthwhile investment."
"The cost of this product varies from customer to customer and the relationship with IBM, including how many offerings from IBM are already being used."
"Our license for Red Hat Fuse is around $27,000 per year, which is very expensive."
"We are paying around $24 million across five years."
"My company pays for the license of Red Hat Fuse yearly. At the end of the day, it's a low-cost solution, and its support licenses are still very decently priced versus bigger operators such as IBM, etc. Red Hat Fuse is much more affordable than other solutions. On a scale of one to five, with one being cheap and five being extremely expensive, I'm rating its pricing a one."
"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"Red Hat Fuse is an expensive tool, though I cannot answer how much it costs as that's confidential."
"We found other solutions were more costly."
"The most important feature of Fuse is the cost. It is open source and a cheap option for an ESB. So, most of the clients in the Middle East and Asian countries prefer this ESB. Other ESBs, like MuleSoft and IBM API Connect, are pretty expensive. Because it is open source, Red Hat Fuse is the cheapest solution, providing almost every integration capability."
"In terms of pricing, Red Hat Fuse is a bit expensive because nowadays, if I'm just comparing it with OpenShift with Kubernetes, so Kubernetes and OpenShift, are similar, and Kubernetes is open source, so Red Hat Fuse is quite expensive in terms of support, but Red Hat Fuse provides value for money because it provides good support. If you want to get something, you need to pay for it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
824,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
31%
Insurance Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM DataPower Gateway?
The MPGW (Multi-Protocol Gateway) is great because it allows you to easily expose services using various protocols – web services, REST (JSON), and others. This flexibility simplifies things.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM DataPower Gateway?
I would rate the pricing a two out of ten, with one being high price, and ten being low price. It's high-priced for smaller companies. But it is okay for enterprises. So, the price could be more fl...
What needs improvement with IBM DataPower Gateway?
The price could be more flexible for different clients.
What do you like most about Red Hat Fuse?
The process workflow, where we can orchestrate and design the application by defining different routes, is really useful.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Red Hat Fuse?
You need to pay for the license. It's not free. I'm not aware of the exact prices. There are no extra costs in addition to the standard licensing since it is a subscription-based solution.
What needs improvement with Red Hat Fuse?
I haven't experienced the online part of Red Hat Fuse. Red Hat Fuse doesn't have a lot of administrative control like other applications. Using administrative control, the operational user can view...
 

Also Known As

WebSphere DataPower, IBM DataPower, IBM WebSphere DataPower
Fuse ESB, FuseSource
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

RBL Bank, Availity
Avianca, American Product Distributors (APD), Kings College Hospital, AMD, CenturyLink, AECOM, E*TRADE
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DataPower Gateway vs. Red Hat Fuse and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.