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

ActiveMQ vs MuleSoft Anypoint Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 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
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (1st), Workload Automation (4th), Cloud Data Integration (4th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of ActiveMQ is 22.4%, down from 25.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MuleSoft Anypoint Platform is 7.7%, down from 11.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
ActiveMQ22.4%
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform7.7%
Other69.9%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

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.
GO
Senior Validation Engineer at Weir Group PLC
Integration workflows have become transparent and secure while error tracking is streamlined
The best features in MuleSoft Anypoint Platform for me are transparency between logging in or deploying and using different environments. Managing different environments for the transparency of error logins or how to trace traceability is very important. It's very easy to use and sort, so you can see where everything has gone right and everything has gone wrong. I'm aware of the drag-and-drop interface in MuleSoft Anypoint Platform, and it's very, very quick. It's very time-saving and very efficient. The security features on MuleSoft Anypoint Platform help maintain data integrity in my organization; I would say it's second to none. It's one of the best out there that I have worked with because of the encryption and decryption, and there are a lot of security aspects. I would assess the platform's data mapping and transformation capabilities as amazing. Automation has been straightforward; the transformation and mapping have been easy to use, easy to source, and from the source to the target. I would say it has been very good.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Reliable message delivery and mirroring."
"ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."
"It provides the best support services."
"The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."
"The main function I find valuable in ActiveMQ is facilitating message transfer within the client's internal network. ActiveMQ handles the message transfer from the internal network to the cloud. Regarding multi-protocols, we use different approaches based on client capabilities. Some clients connect for real-time data transfer, using database queries for periodic updates every ten minutes. We collect data from multiple clients, ensuring we get real-time sensor values where possible and periodic updates for others."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"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 valuable feature of this solution is the holding and forwarding."
"This is a good platform for designing, flowing out APIs, and then doing API-based integrations."
"The most beneficial features for handling data integration with Mule Anypoint Platform include its ability to integrate seamlessly with other popular platforms like IBM, Dell Boomi, and Microsoft Azure. MuleSoft stands out due to its unique one-point solution for various integration problems, including application and network integration, and its iPaaS services. The Design Center allows for designing APIs that can be made into reusable assets. Additionally, MuleSoft's capability to handle various technologies, such as Python and Java Spring Boot APIs, and monitor them using the Flex Gateway is valuable. Regarding API management, MuleSoft offers a gateway facility, including Flex Gateway, which supports API management with robust governance capabilities. Policies like rate limiting, blocklisting, allowlisting, and client ID enforcement can all be managed through the API Manager, providing comprehensive control over API operations."
"The most valuable feature for me is the Exchange sub-tool."
"The most valuable features of the Mule Anypoint Platform are the Flex Gateway, API management, easy-to-use, and connectors. Additionally, they are coming out with improvements to the solution when required."
"The most valuable feature is their integrations and very good API management."
"The integration potential is excellent."
"The solution is scalable, and its performance is quite good."
"We are very satisfied with the DevOps support."
 

Cons

"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."
"One potential area would be the complexity of the initial setup."
"From the TPS point of view, it's like 100,000 transactions that need to be admitted from different devices and also from the different minor small systems. Those are best fit for Kafka. We have used it on the customer side, and we thought of giving a try to ActiveMQ, but we have to do a lot of performance tests and approval is required before we can use it for this scale."
"AI capabilities require improvement in future updates."
"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."
"It would be great if it is included as part of the solution, as Kafka is doing. Even though the use case of Kafka is different, If something like data extraction is possible, or if we can experiment with partition tolerance and other such things, that will be great."
"I would rate the stability a five out of ten because sometimes it gets stuck, and we have to restart it. We"
"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"The terms of use and how it's priced has become very difficult to manage, which is forcing us to look for alternatives already - and we haven't even been using it for that long just yet."
"This becomes an expensive solution over time."
"When we are integrating with other applications, readily available connectors make it easy. However, when it comes to external applications, connectivity isn't as straightforward."
"The inclusion of GenAI in the tool can be good since it is an area that is currently unavailable in the solution."
"One area for improvement is the Community Hub or developer portal, which should be part of the base offering."
"The customer service is not good enough"
"In order to set up a storefront, we currently rely on a third-party solution. It would greatly enhance our operations if this feature was integrated into their existing solution."
"Mule Anypoint Platform is complex for beginners. Users without programming skills will find it complex. It should also improve its pricing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are no fees because it is open-source."
"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."
"It’s open source, ergo free."
"I think the software is free."
"ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."
"The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."
"We use the open-source version."
"The solution is less expensive than its competitors."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing as four or five out of ten."
"The product's price seems to be competent in comparison to other products in the market."
"I rate the product price a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."
"Licensing can be complex as is the case with most iPaaS/cloud offerings."
"The solution's pricing, as per the old approach, is expensive."
"Making changes in Anypoint MQ is expensive."
"The product comes complete at one set price including support."
"Mule Anypoint Platform pricing is slightly higher compared to Dell Boomi."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
30%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
7%
 

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 Business22
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise30
 

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?
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 Mule Anypoint Platform?
I architected solutions using Oracle SOA/OSB, Spring Boot, MuleSoft Anypoint Platform on cloud / on-premises and hybrid modes; What I see is though if you are an enterprise and have enough money th...
How does TIBCO BusinessWorks compare with Mule Anypoint Platform?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether TIBCO BusinessWorks or Mule Anypoint platform integration and connectivity software was the better fit for us. We decided to go with Mule...
What can Mule Anypoint Platform be used for and what do you use it for most often?
This is a very flexible solution that comes with multiple uses. My organization mostly uses Mule Anypoint Platform for API management, as it lets us build new APIs easily and design new interfaces...
 

Also Known As

AMQ
Data Integrator, Anypoint MQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc. 
VMware, Gucci, MasterCard, Target, Time Inc, Hershey's, Tesla, Spotify, Office Depot, Intuit, CBS, Amtrak, Salesforce, Gap, Ralph Lauren
Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveMQ vs. MuleSoft Anypoint Platform and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.