No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Red Hat Fuse vs WSO2 Enterprise Integrator comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 2025

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

Red Hat Fuse
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
WSO2 Enterprise Integrator
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (31st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of Red Hat Fuse is 4.5%, down from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is 4.9%, down from 5.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Red Hat Fuse4.5%
WSO2 Enterprise Integrator4.9%
Other90.6%
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

Nilay Rathod - PeerSpot reviewer
Chapter Area Lead/GM Group Architecture & IT at Spark New Zealand
Microservices have transformed our integrations and now highlight room to improve AI-driven tooling
There are areas in Red Hat Fuse that have room for improvement. We were recently having a discussion with Red Hat team building agentic AI, which we call AI SDLC. Something that the team is actively working on, but I have not really seen any production-level version of it is MCP. For us to use Red Hat Fuse with AI models, we need MCP so that we can be very confident that it can deliver us a really solid outcome when developers are using it, whether it is any of the integration patterns or messaging bus patterns. I have not seen that yet. Even though Red Hat has an alternative to that, such as a plugin, it is not as advanced as some of the MCPs that we see around.
AC
Technical director at Cremete
Effective data transformation and integration in complex environments with high functionality
Something that could be improved in WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is that the problem is not a lack of capability or functionalities. The problem is that it is a very complex environment. To put your hand on this environment is a very demanding task. This is the real problem. The problem is not about the product, but about the complexity to manage, to configure, to decide what to do. I have some experience using SAP R/3. It seems to me something similar. When you have to configure a situation with a client, especially for a client not in an industrial sector, but in a service sector, it is quite usual that you are in trouble for some reason. This is always the story that I found in the implementations I have done. Maybe there are only three or four big problems, in some other cases there are more than that, but this is the situation usually. For WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, not the same, but I must say it is quite often there is a need to put together some pieces and make it work in a coordinated way.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The features I found most valuable in Red Hat Fuse are the OSB framework, containerization, and the integration of Apache technologies such as the NQ channel, CXF, etc. These are the features that are very prominent in the solution. Red Hat Fuse also offers flexibility, so it's another valuable characteristic of the solution."
"I'm recommending Red Hat Fuse to others because it's affordable and it's built on top of technology that is pretty popular and well supported."
"Honestly, it fulfills the needs we have at the moment."
"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."
"Overall, it is a very, very good platform."
"We usually had used PowerCenter for master data integration (by replication). But in some cases, it was better to use Fuse for providing the master data online. It doesn't make it necessary to replicate data."
"I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. We are an enterprise business."
"Any time we contact Red Hat for help we had got a satisficing response."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the integration between core banking and other systems."
"WSO2's analytics capability is good, considering the ELC support they provide."
"It has improved our time management because development is quicker."
"The installation process is easy."
"The productivity is the most valuable feature. It is very easy to write remediations."
"It was mostly easy to set up the product."
"WSO2 Enterprise Integrator may cost you about twenty-five thousand dollars annually per year compared to IBM Cloud Pak, which would cost you around one million dollars."
"Currently, I find the configuration part quite valuable, where you can easily configure things."
 

Cons

"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."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Fuse is the deployment process because it's still very heavy."
"The solution will be discontinued in 2024."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Fuse is the deployment process because it's still very heavy. It's containerized, but now with Spring Boot and other microservices-related containers, deployment is still very heavy. Red Hat Fuse still has room for improvement in terms of becoming more containerized and more oriented."
"Red Hat Fuse is very stable with Apache and Linux but not with Windows. We faced a lot of issues regarding the production setup with Windows - there are a lot of settings that need to be changed to avoid interactions between Fuse and Windows services that Fuse doesn't support."
"Our clients would like to see the user interface improved so that it is more user-friendly."
"With respect to ROI, we have seen it but not as much as we expected. This is because the cost of the product is too high, in more than one sense."
"In the next release, I'd like more stability and more security overall."
"The customization can be a bit difficult."
"If I have to buy software, then it becomes expensive for me."
"The scalability is not strong. If you want to scale it you have to install multiple servers."
"The server is very specific and it is very difficult to get experience with it."
"The configuration of the product is not an easy task for everyone."
"There are a lot of security settings that when you apply you have to re-apply again every time you modify a setting. It is something that really needs to be enhanced."
"You cannot include the validation of XPath."
"The administration side is complex and could use significant improvements to enhance the solution's functionality."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Red Hat Fuse saved us money. It is a lot easier to license for cloud deployments."
"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 expensive product. It costs a lot and although it's worth the money, the explanations that we need to give to our top executives are highly complicated."
"We found other solutions were more costly."
"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 use the standard license, but you need the container platform in order to run it."
"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."
"We are paying around $24 million across five years."
"The open-source, unsupported version is available free of charge."
"It is a low-cost solution."
"I rate the product price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"The cost is better than IBM Cloud Pak."
"The pricing of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for enterprise subscriptions can be considered expensive, especially from the perspective of someone who prefers open-source software."
"The solution costs about 20,000 or 30,000 euros per year, per instance."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise11
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Red Hat Fuse?
When considering pricing for Red Hat Fuse, this is a pretty interesting question. When you consider cost, it is not just the cost of the software, but also the cost of development, cost of usage, a...
What needs improvement with Red Hat Fuse?
There are areas in Red Hat Fuse that have room for improvement. We were recently having a discussion with Red Hat team building agentic AI, which we call AI SDLC. Something that the team is activel...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Fuse?
Red Hat Fuse serves as our enterprise integration platform. We do use some of the message bus features as well, but it is not the enterprise message bus.
What needs improvement with WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
Something that could be improved in WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is that the problem is not a lack of capability or functionalities. The problem is that it is a very complex environment. To put your ...
What is your primary use case for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
A typical use case for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is when I am in an interoperability environment with healthcare facilities and I have to put together a lot of applications that share some HL7 mes...
What advice do you have for others considering WSO2 Enterprise Integrator?
For simpler tasks or simpler use cases, we avoid using WSO2 Enterprise Integrator because it is quite complex. So it is easier to manage some more simple solutions than that. WSO2 Enterprise Integr...
 

Also Known As

Fuse ESB, FuseSource
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Avianca, American Product Distributors (APD), Kings College Hospital, AMD, CenturyLink, AECOM, E*TRADE
West
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat Fuse vs. WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.