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

Oracle Service Bus vs Red Hat Fuse comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Oracle Service Bus
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
5th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
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 Oracle Service Bus is 12.5%, up from 12.1% 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

Radhey Rajput - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows seamless integration and connectivity with different types of systems
I would suggest using this solution. Oracle Service Bus is very good. Any organization can use it. So it's very robust and scalable, and its security features are very good. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten because there are some loopholes in service and support. Sometimes, when we have issues and go to Oracle support, they will not give us solutions. Instead, they will ask for so many log files and emails. The product is good, but the support is not.
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

"API management and defining varying protocols are the most valuable features"
"The solution integrates external systems by providing a lot of APIs for external transactions, such as open purchase orders and sales orders."
"It is lightweight and one can easily integrate with different applications, databases, JMS, or web services through different protocols."
"The routing and aggregation are the most valuable features. It's split and join."
"Monitoring feature that allows tracking of the web's UI development."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that you can connect with different applications."
"The most valuable feature is the adapters."
"Service Bus is good at routing the transformation."
"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."
"It's very lightweight. There's no need for any specialized tools in order to deploy any service for Red Hat Fuse."
"We use it because it is easy to integrate with any other application...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is the software development environment."
"The stability has been good."
"The most valuable feature is that it's the same as Apache Camel."
"Red Hat Fuse's best features are that it's very easy to set up and maintain."
"Because we have been doing Red Hat Fuse projects for three years, and over time we have matured, we can employ similar use cases and make use of accelerators or templates. It gives us an edge when we deliver these services or APIs quickly."
 

Cons

"Security needs to be more integrated."
"There is significant room for improvement in the monitoring capabilities."
"The initial setup is likely complex for many organizations."
"What needs improvement in Oracle Service Bus is the connectivity between adapters such as the Salesforce adapter and database adapters. The limited number of adapters compatible with Oracle Service Bus makes you want to switch to a different solution."
"The pricing of the product could be better. It's a bit high."
"This solution would benefit from having more cloud-based adapters."
"There are times when I select components in composite and they do not appear, and I cannot figure out why."
"The inconvenient part about working with this product is that it's very heavy, requiring a lot of people and a lot of resources."
"It might help if, in the documentation, there were a comments section or some kind of community input. I might read a page of documentation and not fully understand everything, or it might not quite answer the question I had. If there were a section associated with it where people could discuss the same topic, that might be helpful because somebody else might have already asked the question that I had."
"Red Hat Fuse doesn't have a lot of administrative control like other applications."
"Red Hat is not easy to learn. You can learn it but you sometimes need external expertise to implement solutions."
"The monitoring experience should be better."
"The pricing model could be adjusted. The price should be lower."
"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."
"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."
"The stability of the solution is an area with a shortcoming that needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is on the higher side."
"We have an unlimited yearly license."
"Oracle Service Bus is a bit expensive"
"I'm not aware of how much Oracle Service Bus costs."
"This is a very expensive product and the price varies depending on factors such as the number of processors and the number of users. Our licensing fees are approximately $300,000."
"The price of this solution is better than the subscription-based Mule ESB."
"The solution doesn't have independent licensing."
"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."
"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."
"We use the standard license, but you need the container platform in order to run it."
"After doing some Googling and comparisons, the main standouts were MuleSoft and Red Hat Fuse. One of the big factors in our decision to go with Fuse was the licensing cost. It was cheaper to go with Fuse."
"Our license for Red Hat Fuse is around $27,000 per year, which is very expensive."
"This is an open-source product that can be used free of charge."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
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 Oracle Service Bus?
The stability is consistently high, with only one notable issue encountered.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Oracle Service Bus?
Integration was expensive around ten to fifteen years ago due to the need for highly specialized staff, not easily affordable for normal people.
What needs improvement with Oracle Service Bus?
The consolidation functionality is minimal, lacking advanced features for complex integrations. This includes eliminating internal company transactions for financial reporting, which currently take...
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

No data available
Fuse ESB, FuseSource
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

MakeMyTrip Ltd., Griffith University, Colab Consulting Pty. Ltd., Pacfico Seguros Generales, IGEPA IT-SERVICE GmbH, Guangzhou Municipal Human Resources and Social Security Bureau, Pacfico Seguros Generales, Bank Audi S.A.L., Rydges Sydney Airport, Intelligent Pathways, Nacional Monte de Piedad IAP
Avianca, American Product Distributors (APD), Kings College Hospital, AMD, CenturyLink, AECOM, E*TRADE
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle Service Bus vs. Red Hat Fuse and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.