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

Red Hat Fuse vs TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

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
TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Red Hat Fuse is 8.8%, down from 10.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus is 4.2%, down from 4.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Mustofa Yonus - PeerSpot reviewer
A robust product that needs to improve the functionality it offers related to API lifecycle management
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a six to seven out of ten. My company consists of around 7000 employees, and we use the solution as an integrated service in around 300 to 400 systems, both internally and externally, making it a huge number. Our company uses the solution every minute and every second, and we can't function without it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is that it's the same as Apache Camel."
"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."
"The support training that comes with the product is amazing."
"The most valuable feature is the software development environment."
"I found it was quite easy to set up and implement."
"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."
"The solution is stable. We have gone for months or years without any issue. There are no memory restarts, so from my point of view, it's very stable."
"The initial setup process is quite straightforward."
"The product’s most valuable feature is stability."
"The stability of this solution is excellent."
"The most valuable feature is that it is a service-oriented architecture, SOA-based."
"It's very stable and reliable."
"It is easy to develop. It has a very wide range of features. The older versions are very stable, and there are no issues with the product."
"The GUI and IDE features of this solution are easy to work with and to develop. We find application management easy using this solution. It is a stable product"
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that the performance is robust."
"The most attractive and beneficial feature is the ease of development."
 

Cons

"The main issue with Red Hat Fuse is the outdated and scattered documentation."
"There is definitely a bit of a learning curve."
"As its learning curve is quite steep, developer dependency will always be there in the case of a Red Hat Fuse development. This should be improved for developers. There should be some built-in connectors so the grind of the developer can be reduced."
"Our clients would like to see the user interface improved so that it is more user-friendly."
"In the next release, I'd like more stability and more security overall."
"The testing part, specifically when running it in the cloud, could be improved. It's a little bit complex, especially considering its cloud nature."
"Red Hat is not easy to learn. You can learn it but you sometimes need external expertise to implement solutions."
"I would like to see more up-to-date documentation and examples from Red Hat Fuse."
"The intermediate version that we are using has stability issues. These stability issues should be resolved, but it seems like TIBCO is not focusing on resolving these issues. The resolution timelines are quite high even for high-priority incidents. Its price should be lower. Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."
"I don't like the product's API management platform, as it doesn't offer users enough functionality to help with API lifecycle management, making it a product that is way behind its competitors."
"In the next release, there should be improvements made to the API manager."
"In the configuration, where we need to customize, it takes more time that we expect it to, ideally."
"Issues with the support, the fees, and the termination of the professional services are reasons we are looking for other solutions."
"The initial setup process could be easier."
"If TIBCO could be able to sort the size of their base image in the Container edition, it would be really marvelous. Right now it's around 299 MB. We'd really want it to reduce to a few MBs."
"The solution is very expensive when you use multiple components, it would b better if this could be reduced."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"We are paying around $24 million across five years."
"The solution doesn't have independent licensing."
"Red Hat Fuse saved us money. It is a lot easier to license for cloud deployments."
"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."
"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."
"The price is on the higher side. For the same price, if I go to the previous version, I would have got a lot more capacity with similar kinds of features."
"The licensing cost is a challenge for quite a few customers."
"The biggest issue disadvantage of TIBCO is that it is expensive."
"When it comes to cost, TIBCO is much more competitive than a product like Pega."
"Price-wise, I would say that the product is expensive."
"Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Retailer
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What do you like most about TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus?
The most valuable feature of the solution is that the performance is robust.
What needs improvement with TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus?
I don't like the product's API management platform, as it doesn't offer users enough functionality to help with API lifecycle management, making it a product that is way behind its competitors. The...
 

Also Known As

Fuse ESB, FuseSource
ActiveMatrix Service Bus
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Avianca, American Product Distributors (APD), Kings College Hospital, AMD, CenturyLink, AECOM, E*TRADE
Colonial Life, CTBC Bank, New World Mobility, QUALCOMM, Swisscom Mobile, T-Mobile USA, Tata Teleservices, Telecom Italia
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat Fuse vs. TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.