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

Amazon SQS Reviews

Vendor: Amazon Web Services (AWS)
4.3 out of 5
Badge Leader
Leave a review

What is Amazon SQS?

Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS) is a fully managed message queuing service that enables you to decouple and scale microservices, distributed systems, and serverless applications. SQS eliminates the complexity and overhead associated with managing and operating message oriented middleware, and empowers developers to focus on differentiating work. Using SQS, you can send, store, and receive messages between software components at any volume, without losing messages or requiring other services to be available. Get started with SQS in minutes using the AWS console, Command Line Interface or SDK of your choice, and three simple commands.

Get the Amazon SQS Buyer's Guide and find out what your peers are saying about Amazon SQS, MuleSoft Anypoint Platform, IBM MQ and more!
Amazon SQS is the #3 ranked solution in top Message Queue Software. PeerSpot users give Amazon SQS an average rating of 8.6 out of 10. Amazon SQS is most commonly compared to MuleSoft Anypoint Platform: Amazon SQS vs MuleSoft Anypoint Platform. Amazon SQS is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 55% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 20% of all views.
Buyer's Guide
Amazon SQS
August 2025
Get the report
Helped 866,218 peers since 2012

Featured Amazon SQS reviews

Read more reviews

Amazon SQS mindshare

As of August 2025, the mindshare of Amazon SQS in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category stands at 8.1%, down from 10.6% compared to the previous year, according to calculations based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Amazon SQS8.1%
IBM MQ26.9%
ActiveMQ26.2%
Other38.8%
Message Queue (MQ) Software

PeerResearch reports based on Amazon SQS reviews

TypeTitleDate
CategoryMessage Queue (MQ) SoftwareAug 29, 2025Download
ProductReviews, tips, and advice from real usersAug 29, 2025Download
ComparisonAmazon SQS vs IBM MQAug 29, 2025Download
ComparisonAmazon SQS vs ActiveMQAug 29, 2025Download
ComparisonAmazon SQS vs MuleSoft Anypoint PlatformAug 29, 2025Download
Suggested products
TitleRatingMindshareRecommending
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform4.08.6%92%59 interviewsAdd to research
IBM MQ4.226.9%94%170 interviewsAdd to research
 
 
Key learnings from peers

Valuable Features

Amazon SQS is valued for its scalability, reliability, and integration with AWS services like Lambda and EC2. Users appreciate its abilities for message handling, including FIFO queues, event-driven invocation, and dead-letter queues. It is user-friendly, cost-effective, with excellent documentation and support. SQS's message visibility, durability, high performance, and ease of setup are also notable. It enhances workflow resilience, decouples components, supports large-scale data, and ensures data retention up to 14 days.
  • "Overall, I would rate Amazon SQS as ten out of ten."
  • "The most valuable feature is the ability to decouple components."
  • "The scale it manages is quite impressive."

Room for Improvement

Amazon SQS needs improved documentation, enhanced telemetry, and on-premises availability. Its interface lacks user-friendliness and integration with legacy systems is limited. Pricing is high and retention periods are insufficient. Message size and latency issues persist, while the existing security measures need strengthening. The AWS Management Console requires better integration capabilities for seamless transitions. Users find the lack of push-based messaging and message content viewing without removal challenging. Enhanced logging, scalability, and UI improvements are necessary.
  • "The retention period for messages could be improved. Currently, messages are retained for four or seven days."
  • "The cost became an issue, leading us to consider other solutions."
  • "A primary area of improvement for Amazon SQS is the message size limitation, which is currently restricted to 256 kilobytes per message."

ROI

Amazon SQS demonstrates value by enhancing processing, improving client-side performance, and ensuring message integrity during spikes in usage. It offers significant returns despite higher upfront costs. Users benefit from increased productivity and reduced man-hour expenses, allowing focus on essential tasks. Infrastructure reliability is improved, avoiding disruptions via DLQs and SNS. While cost is a concern, SQS contributes positively to programming and overall system integrity, proving its effectiveness in handling client requests efficiently.

Pricing

Amazon SQS is generally viewed as cost-effective by enterprise users due to its pay-as-you-go model. Many users appreciate the free tier, offering the first million requests free each month, with subsequent requests costing 40 cents per million. Feedback is mixed; while some find it moderately priced and cheaper than alternatives, others indicate that costs can escalate with high volume or scalability. Nonetheless, its pricing is often rated positively.
  • "Amazon SQS offers a generous free tier, beyond which it remains very cost-effective. The cost per million messages is less than a dollar, making it an economical choice."
  • "Compared to the other options and based on what I have heard, Amazon SQS is relatively more expensive, but it is not insanely expensive."
  • "Compared to EC2 and other services, Amazon SQS' pricing is cheaper."

Popular Use Cases

Amazon SQS is primarily used for event-driven messaging, decoupling applications, and achieving asynchronous communication. Users employ it to collect event data for analytics, integrate diverse applications, trigger resources like Lambda and API Gateway, manage retries, and process notifications. It's favored for use in microservices and distributed systems for message queuing, ensuring reliable communication, handling large volumes of messages, and enabling efficient task execution across various industries.

Service and Support

Amazon SQS customer service presents mixed experiences. Some users find the technical support responsive and knowledgeable, rating it highly, especially with enterprise models. However, others mention costly support, slow response times, and inconsistent service. Many rely on rich documentation and simple components, reducing the need for direct assistance. Feedback highlights significant discrepancies in support quality depending on user payment levels, with smaller clients feeling neglected compared to those investing in higher-tier services.

Deployment

Amazon SQS's initial setup is often described as simple and straightforward. Users find it easy to deploy and configure, often taking only a few hours with the help of detailed documentation. Familiarity with AWS services enhances the process, and while security considerations may extend deployment time, most users agree it is manageable. Experience levels affect the perceived difficulty, but once understood, SQS is generally implemented with minimal hassle.

Scalability

Amazon SQS demonstrates high scalability, with users noting its ability to handle large message volumes efficiently. It scales both horizontally and vertically without issues, accommodating various needs in cloud applications. Users appreciate its integration with AWS services and capability to manage peak workloads. However, some emphasize that configuration might be necessary to address usage limitations and message duplicates. Despite minor considerations, organizations successfully utilize Amazon SQS for scalable, stable performance.

Stability

Users consistently find Amazon SQS very stable, with many rating its stability as high as nine or ten out of ten. Most have not encountered significant issues, citing no performance or stability problems, and praise its ability to handle loads effectively. Some mention potential for improvement or rare but insignificant issues such as message delivery timing. Users appreciate its reliability compared to other services like RabbitMQ, ActiveMQ, and Kafka, noting it requires less maintenance.
These insights are based on the in-depth reviews provided by peers to help you make a better buying decision.
Download our Amazon SQS Buyer's Guide for additional reliable information.

Review data by company size

By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
By visitors reading reviews
Company SizeCount
Small Business123
Midsize Enterprise104
Large Enterprise279
By visitors reading reviews

Top industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
5%
Healthcare Company
4%
Media Company
4%
University
3%
Insurance Company
3%
Retailer
3%
Construction Company
3%
Real Estate/Law Firm
2%
Pharma/Biotech Company
2%
Hospitality Company
2%
Energy/Utilities Company
2%
Recreational Facilities/Services Company
2%
Legal Firm
2%
Non Profit
2%
Wholesaler/Distributor
1%
Government
1%
Performing Arts
1%
Transportation Company
1%
Outsourcing Company
1%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
1%

Compare Amazon SQS with alternative products

Go!

Learn more about Amazon SQS

SQS offers two types of message queues. Standard queues offer maximum throughput, best-effort ordering, and at-least-once delivery. SQS FIFO queues are designed to guarantee that messages are processed exactly once, in the exact order that they are sent.

Amazon SQS customers

EMS, NASA, BMW, Capital One

Related questions

  • 23
When evaluating Message Queue, what aspect do you think is the most important to look for?
  • 60
What Message Queue (MQ) Software do you recommend? Why?
  • 52
What is the best MQ software out there?
  • 95
What is MQ software?
  • 13
Why is Message Queue (MQ) Software important for companies?

Product Categories

Product Categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software

Popular Comparisons

Popular Comparisons
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs Amazon SQS Logo
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs Amazon SQS
IBM MQ vs Amazon SQS Logo
IBM MQ vs Amazon SQS
ActiveMQ vs Amazon SQS Logo
ActiveMQ vs Amazon SQS
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions vs Amazon SQS Logo
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions vs Amazon SQS
Red Hat AMQ vs Amazon SQS Logo
Red Hat AMQ vs Amazon SQS
PubSub+ Platform vs Amazon SQS Logo
PubSub+ Platform vs Amazon SQS
Amazon MQ vs Amazon SQS Logo
Amazon MQ vs Amazon SQS
EMQX vs Amazon SQS Logo
EMQX vs Amazon SQS
Oracle Event Hub Cloud Service vs Amazon SQS Logo
Oracle Event Hub Cloud Service vs Amazon SQS
See all alternatives
 
Amazon SQS Reviews Summary
Author infoRatingReview Summary
IT Specialist with 51-200 employees5.0I primarily use Amazon SQS for asynchronous messaging in our distributed system. Its data retention, message durability, and queue generation features are valuable. Compared to RabbitMQ and ActiveMQ, SQS offers better reliability and reduced management overhead, enhancing productivity.
Senior Cloud Engineer - AWS at Bytedance3.5I have been using Amazon SQS for ten years as part of AWS for asynchronous data transitions between systems. Its event-driven invocation is valuable. However, its handling of large-scale data could improve, especially compared to Kinesis.
Senior Java Engineer at Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services3.5I use AWS services like Lambda, S3, EC2, ECS, and SNS SQS for tasks like our email notification system. I find AWS Lambda, ECS, and QuickSight valuable, but I believe integrating Kafka could improve data streaming flexibility.
AWS Competency Lead at trask4.5I use Amazon SQS to synchronize logistics and customer orders with its scalability, availability, and cost-effectiveness. While the FIFO pricing could improve, SQS remains a favored choice over RabbitMQ in Europe, though some prefer Apache Kafka for compatibility.
Senior DevOps Engineer | AWS | Kubernetes | Terraform | CICD | Cyber Security Specialist at a tech services company with 11-50 employees5.0I use Amazon SQS to decouple applications by converting monoliths into microservices, leveraging its scalability and FIFO queue for message order. However, I wish it allowed viewing message content without removing it from the queue.
Product Development Engineer at Razorpay5.0We use Amazon SQS within our company's microservices for reliable retries and workflow continuity, especially during third-party service downtime. It's easy to manage and integrate, though AWS Management Console could improve seamless migration from solutions like Apache Kafka.
AWS Academy Accredited Instructor - ACF & CCA at APU4.5No summary available
AWS Architect at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees4.5I've used Amazon SQS for over four years in serverless, decoupled solutions. SQS excels in handling large data scales and integrates well with other AWS services. However, it has a message size limit and uses a pull-based system.