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

ActiveMQ vs Aurea CX Messenger comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 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

ActiveMQ
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Aurea CX Messenger
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
12th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (6th), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (14th), SOA Governance (4th), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of ActiveMQ is 26.1%, up from 22.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Eyob Alemu - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient data flow management with high performance and occasional stability improvements
For high traffic volumes where management time on ActiveMQ is minimal and where the rate of flow from the provider is slower than from the consumer, ActiveMQ offers the highest performance based on our experience. It has been efficient for data flow control between two endpoints, despite occasional unexpected glitches. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
Radhey Rajput - PeerSpot reviewer
Lightweight and efficient solution
It's very good and lightweight. But, it does not provide web service communication. But it is excellent for internal connections One valuable feature is the messaging broker. If there is a disruption, it restores the messages. And when the application is running, it delivers all the messages. The…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."
"Message broadcasting: There could be a use case sending the same message to all consumers. So as a producer, I broadcast the message to a topic. Then, whichever consumers are subscribed to the topic can consume the same message."
"The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"I am impressed with the tool’s latency. Also, the messages in ActiveMQ wait in a queue. The messages will start to move when the system reopens after getting stuck."
"The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."
"Most people or many people recommended using ActiveMQ on small and medium-scale applications."
"Reliable message delivery and mirroring."
"We value ActiveMQ for its performance, throughput, and low latency, especially in handling large volumes of data and sequential management of topics."
"The solution offers excellent stability."
"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."
"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."
 

Cons

"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."
"It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues."
"This solution could improve by providing better documentation."
"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 solution's stability needs improvement."
"For additional functionality, I suggest making it easier to install and monitor the queues, topics, broker status, publisher status, and consumer status. Improved monitoring tools would help avoid needing to manually access the server for monitoring purposes."
"One potential area would be the complexity of the initial setup."
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are using the open-source version, so we have not looked at any pricing."
"There are no fees because it is open-source."
"ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."
"The solution is less expensive than its competitors."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."
"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."
"It’s open source, ergo free."
"I think the software is free."
"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."
"The pricing is not so high."
"You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscription"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Insurance Company
9%
Media Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ActiveMQ?
For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery.
What needs improvement with ActiveMQ?
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 c...
What is your primary use case for ActiveMQ?
ActiveMQ inside AP is one of those powerful features because we generally use ActiveMQ for acting on incidents which do not involve any human interaction or personal activity. For example, you have...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

AMQ
CX Messenger Enterprise, Aurea Sonic ESB, Aurea Sonic, Aurea Sonic MQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc. 
Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom Mortgage
Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveMQ vs. Aurea CX Messenger and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.