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

IBM MQ vs TIBCO Rendezvous comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

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
163
Ranking in other categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software (1st)
TIBCO Rendezvous
Ranking in Business Activity Monitoring
4th
Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Business Activity Monitoring category, the mindshare of IBM MQ is 42.0%, down from 43.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO Rendezvous is 8.7%, up from 4.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Activity Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

SelvaKumar4 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
MP
Good communication, stable, and responsive support
TIBCO Rendezvous has some difficulties to be deployed in a cloud environment. We use it typically in a bare-metal infrastructure. We can use a cluster of the nodes of the other companies. For example, we cannot deploy in the cloud infrastructure, but the companies cannot deploy TIBCO Rendezvous in a cloud environment without issues. It is very easy to start the TIBCO Rendezvous in the DMO infrastructure. The first time we deployed TIBCO Rendezvous, we used it to support individual transaction integration between the distributed and mainframe applications. We spent approximately five days deploying TIBCO Rendezvous in the companies in their application. It's very fast to implement and to use.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the architecture it provides seamlessly for assured delivery."
"IBM is still adding some features and coding some other systems on the security end. However, it has the most security features I've seen in a communication solution. Security is the most important thing for our purposes."
"It's highly scalable. It provides various ways to establish high availability and workloads. E.g., you can spread workloads inside of your clusters."
"It is quite stable."
"We have implemented business to business transactions over MQ messaging. The guaranteed and once only delivery ensures business integrity."
"I haven't seen any severe issues related to it. Most of the time it's running. That is the advantage of IBM MQ."
"Secure, safe, and very fast."
"The solution allows one to easily configure an IBM MQQueueManager."
"TIBCO Rendezvous has a strategy to communicate in the network between the DMO of the product. They provide strategy through secure communication. They use the UDP protocol, but It's not a resilient protocol. They put another protocol to create a type of guarantee. It has a high level of communication between the DMO. This is the best capability the solution has."
 

Cons

"I wanted to upgrade Windows Server. It's not that easy to move."
"If they could come up with monitoring dashboards that would be good. We are using external monitoring tools, apart from our IBM MQ, to monitor IBM MQ. If we could get monitoring tools or dashboards to keep everything simple for the user to understand, that would be good."
"Should have more integration in the monitoring tools."
"Better error handling, such as a default dead message queue for errors, would be beneficial."
"We are looking at the latest version, and we hope that resilience, high availability, and monitoring will be improved. It can have some more improvements in the heterogeneous messaging feature. The current solution is on-premises, so good integration with public cloud messaging solutions would be useful."
"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."
"They probably need to virtualize the MQ flow and allow us to design the MQ flow using the UI. It would also help to migrate to the cloud easily and implement AWS Lambda functions with minimum coding. If you have to code, then just with NodeJS or Java."
"In IBM MQ, the channel connection is an area where my company faces some limitations. At times, we hit limitations on the connection, meaning the connection is fully occupied."
"TIBCO Rendezvous is currently restricted in a cloud environment and it would be more useful in a hybrid cloud setup. It does not work correctly in a cloud environment alone. This is something they can improve in the future."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The problem with this product is that it's a little bit expensive."
"IBM MQ has a flexible license model based on the Processor Value Unit (PVU) and I recommend it."
"The price of IBM MQ could improve by being less expensive."
"Licensing for this software is on a yearly basis. The standard fee includes the maintenance and updates that are released periodically."
"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."
"There is real money involved here. As compared to RabbitMQ, IBM MQ is on the higher side in terms of cost."
"Use the new and lightweight version (Liberty) to lower licensing costs. It is also easier to upgrade/maintain."
"There is a license needed to use this solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Activity Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
38%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Government
5%
Financial Services Firm
58%
Computer Software Company
14%
Energy/Utilities Company
4%
University
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

WebSphere MQ
Rendezvous
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Agilent Technologies, Vodafone Hutchison Australia
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM MQ vs. TIBCO Rendezvous and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,296 professionals have used our research since 2012.