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

ActiveMQ vs Apache Kafka comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

ActiveMQ
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software (2nd)
Apache Kafka
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

ActiveMQ and Apache Kafka aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. ActiveMQ is designed for Message Queue (MQ) Software and holds a mindshare of 20.0%, down 25.4% compared to last year.
Apache Kafka, on the other hand, focuses on Streaming Analytics, holds 3.6% mindshare, up 3.6% since last year.
Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ActiveMQ20.0%
IBM MQ21.3%
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions9.7%
Other49.0%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache Kafka3.6%
Databricks7.4%
Apache Flink7.0%
Other82.0%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

MD
Software Engineer III at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Integration capabilities enhance message handling without human interaction
With ActiveMQ there should be more options. If you work with other technologies, for example, Java, there are many options. We can integrate the way we want ActiveMQ. We can create partitions and clusters, but AP is not providing such options currently. It only provides time, request response timing, the number of requests that need to be handled, and protocol types. The configuration needs to be broadened inside AP to perform in a better way. Sometimes issues arise in production with ActiveMQ due to the number of requests. For example, if you have configured one thousand requests at a time and it receives one thousand and one messages at a time, it breaks. The configuration aspect is tricky. When configurations are proper, ActiveMQ almost has zero errors.
Amandeep Pawar - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineer Technology at Iris Software Technologies Private Limited
Event-driven architecture has improved asynchronous communication and supports high throughput
We can improve the high throughput because there are some limitations. We could add something to improve Apache Kafka. Based on my daily usage and analysis, there is a complex setup and management, which is one area requiring improvement. Apache Kafka does not have built-in message delay or scheduling capabilities. Apache Kafka cannot natively schedule messages. Limited message prioritization is also an area requiring improvement. Ordering is limited to a single partition. Large messages affect performance. Apache Kafka is optimized for many small to medium-sized messages, but large payloads increase network usage, increase disk usage, and slow down producers and consumers. I rate Apache Kafka eight out of ten instead of ten out of ten because operating an Apache Kafka cluster requires expertise in partitioning, application monitoring, and capacity planning. Self-managed deployment can become complex as the cluster grows. Pro-managed Apache Kafka services significantly reduce the operational overhead.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"For us, initial setup was VERY easy since we were using the Apache-provided Docker image for ActiveMQ, which alleviates a lot of the traditional pains involved with installing new software."
"ActiveMQ is a great messaging system for synchronizing call and "fire and forget" types of calls."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"Loose coupling of components by the use of messaging queues allows for completely separate component life cycles and ownership within the organization."
"ActiveMQ demonstrates excellent stability and sturdiness."
"Depending on the problem, AMQ resolved nearly everything."
"The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable."
"Kafka is good, but Kafka as a cloud service is awesome!!"
"Scalability is very good."
"Overall, I rate Apache Kafka as nine out of ten for its scalability and stability."
"Kafka allows you to handle huge amounts of data and classify it into different categories. If you have huge amounts of data, Kafka is a very good solution for data classification."
"The most valuable feature of Apache Kafka is the clustering which is very easy to scale and we have multiple servers all over our platforms. It has been useful for stability and performance."
"I believe that the speed, and especially the performance, are very good features."
"Apache Kafka has improved our organization because it's more reliable than Rabbit."
"It is easy to configure."
 

Cons

"One potential area would be the complexity of the initial setup."
"There is need for more protocols and maybe they should provide documentation on the internet as well."
"AI capabilities require improvement in future updates."
"Another area of improvement is the monitoring console, which is kind of rudimentary."
"The clustering for sure needs improvement. When we were using it, the only thing available was an active/passive relationship that had to be maintained via shared file storage. That model includes a single point of failure in that storage medium."
"We ran into various stability problems with our implementations over the years."
"Even though there is support from many open source communities, there is still weakness in ease-of-use and ease-of-configuration for more complex scenarios."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"In Apache Kafka, it is currently difficult to create a consumer."
"The ability to connect the producers and consumers must be improved."
"They need to have a proper portal to do everything because, at this moment, Kafka is lagging in this regard."
"I would like them to reduce the learning curve around the creation of brokers and topics. They also need to improve on the concept of the partitions."
"The solution's initial setup process was complex."
"Lacks elasticity and the ability to scale down."
"Kafka requires non-trivial expertise with DevOps to deploy in production at scale. The organization needs to understand ZooKeeper and Kafka and should consider using additional tools, such as MirrorMaker, so that the organization can survive an availability zone or a region going down."
"The management overhead is more compared to the messaging system. There are challenges here and there. Like for long usage, it requires restarts and nodes from time to time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are using the open-source version, so we have not looked at any pricing."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."
"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."
"The solution is less expensive than its competitors."
"It’s open source, ergo free."
"I think the software is free."
"ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."
"There are no fees because it is open-source."
"Running a Kafka cluster can be expensive, especially if you need to scale it up to handle large amounts of data."
"This is an open-source solution and is free to use."
"Licensing issues are not applicable. Apache licensing makes it simple with almost zero cost for the software itself."
"The price for the enterprise version is quite high. For on-premise, there is an annual fee, which starts at 60,000 euros, but it is usually higher than 100,000 euros. The cost for a project including the subscription is usually between 100,000 to 200,000 euros. The cost also depends on the level of support. There are two different levels of support."
"It's a bit cheaper compared to other Q applications."
"The solution is open source; it's free to use."
"We use the free version."
"The solution is open source."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise51
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with ActiveMQ?
Pricing is something to consider with ActiveMQ, though cloud pricing is not costly and depends upon the compute selection. Focusing on AI is essential nowadays. AI capabilities require improvement ...
What is your primary use case for ActiveMQ?
In my current organization, I'm only working with ActiveMQ. I previously worked with IBM WebSphere MQ.
What advice do you have for others considering ActiveMQ?
We have not deployed ActiveMQ's flexible clustering as that requirement is not present for us. We only use active-passive configuration. On a scale of one to ten, I rate ActiveMQ a ten out of ten.
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Kafka?
Based on my understanding for the setup and cost to set up Apache Kafka, I was not responsible for the pricing or licensing decisions. Apache Kafka itself is open source and free to use. Infrastruc...
What needs improvement with Apache Kafka?
We can improve the high throughput because there are some limitations. We could add something to improve Apache Kafka. Based on my daily usage and analysis, there is a complex setup and management,...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

AMQ
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc. 
Uber, Netflix, Activision, Spotify, Slack, Pinterest
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Apache, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.