ActiveMQ vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions comparison

Apache and Broadcom are both solutions in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category. Apache is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.5, while Broadcom is ranked #6 with an average rating of 8.3. Apache holds a 19.8% mindshare in MQ, compared to Broadcom’s 9.6% mindshare. Additionally, 89% of Apache users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of Broadcom users who would recommend it.

ActiveMQ

Read 28 ActiveMQ reviews

5,209 Views
5,001 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Read 85 VMware Tanzu Data Solutions reviews

8,267 Views
2,149 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

ActiveMQ

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and ActiveMQ are both open-source tools catering to different IT needs. VMware Tanzu leads in database performance and analytics, while ActiveMQ stands out in messaging and ease of use.

Features: VMware Tanzu excels with high performance, scalability, and integration with Hadoop and Big Data. Its robust parallel processing capabilities make it extremely efficient for analytics. ActiveMQ is notable for message queuing, providing features like message persistence, clustering, and support for multiple protocols.

Room for Improvement: VMware Tanzu could improve stability and integration features, and simplify complex administrative tasks. ActiveMQ can refine clustering capabilities, improve its monitoring console, and enhance documentation and support for additional protocols.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: VMware Tanzu offers hybrid and public cloud deployment options, with customer service varying in quality. ActiveMQ is mainly deployed on-premises, with support that is generally robust but often reliant on community forums.

Pricing and ROI: Both VMware Tanzu and ActiveMQ are cost-effective due to their open-source nature. VMware Tanzu's paid features offer flexibility and value for advanced functionalities, whereas ActiveMQ's affordability remains appealing, providing significant functionality at no cost.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions Report (Updated: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 900,747 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software

6th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Database Development and Management (8th), Relational Databases Tools (23rd), Data Warehouse (10th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of ActiveMQ is 19.8%, down from 26.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is 9.6%, up from 4.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
ActiveMQ	19.8%
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions	9.6%
Other	70.6%

Message Queue (MQ) Software

Q&A Highlights

Miriam Tover

Service Delivery Manager at PeerSpot

Jun 27, 2019

What is the biggest difference between ActiveMQ and RabbitMQ?

RabbitMQ has a larger installed base and more active OSS community.

See all answers

Featured Reviews

Nedunchezhian Samaraju

Sr. Manager - Digital at IndiGo

Offers diverse messaging protocols and excellent cloud support

In my current organization, I'm only working with ActiveMQ. I previously worked with IBM WebSphere MQ The features of ActiveMQ and WebSphere MQ fundamentally do the same thing. From my experience, I prefer WebSphere MQ. Both are very sturdy solutions; there is no doubt. Both are sturdy and…

Read full review

Karthik Shivaram

Sr. Manager at STI INFOTECH PVT LTD

Improved multi-cloud data management has simplified operations and supports seamless Kubernetes

From my perspective, the biggest challenge with VMware right now is the pricing. To be very honest, in many cases I find myself recommending alternative solutions instead of VMware. Even if those alternatives come with a bit more complexity, customers are often more willing to accept that than the current VMware pricing model. In the past, VMware used a socket-based licensing model, which was easier for customers to understand and budget for. Now the shift to a core-based licensing model has significantly increased costs for many environments, especially for organizations running modern high-core CPUs. One positive aspect of the new model is that VMware has bundled several components together. For example, earlier when deploying vSphere, customers also had to purchase vCenter separately for management. Now multiple components are packaged into a single SKU, which simplifies some aspects of procurement and deployment. While this consolidation has its benefits, the overall licensing and commercial costs remain very high. Pricing is not the only issue. I believe Broadcom also needs to reconsider its strategy in light of the current market conditions. The approach they are taking may be strategic from a business perspective, but from what I see in the field, it is leading to lost opportunities. Many customers who previously relied on VMware are now actively exploring alternative virtualization platforms. I’m not sure where this direction will ultimately lead, but based on my experience, it is already affecting adoption. Since you’ve been trying to reach me for some time—and we also had a discussion a couple of years ago—I hope this feedback helps Broadcom understand the current sentiment in the market and potentially make adjustments. Another important concern is the way features are bundled. In many cases, customers only need basic virtualization and high availability capabilities. However, the current packaging often includes additional features that they may not need. A good analogy is that if a customer only needs an entry-level car, we shouldn’t be forced to sell them a Rolls-Royce. VMware could benefit from adopting a more modular or à la carte licensing model, where customers can choose only the components they truly require. For example, if a customer only needs core virtualization functionality, they should be able to purchase just that. This would allow partners and solution providers to better align solutions with customer requirements and position VMware more competitively in the market. Another challenge I want to highlight is the pricing model based on U.S. dollars and the way multi-year licensing is handled. In many enterprise and government projects, customers prefer to commit to three-year or five-year licenses and pay the full amount upfront. However, in approximately 20% of the deals I work on, we lose opportunities because VMware only provides dollar-based pricing for the first year. When it comes to the following years, the contract requires renewals annually rather than allowing a fixed multi-year upfront payment. This approach is particularly problematic for government and public sector customers. Many of them are ready and willing to pay for three or five years in advance, but the current VMware model does not support that structure effectively. Because pricing is tied to the U.S. dollar and subject to yearly adjustments, VMware does not lock in pricing for the full term. From a customer’s perspective, this introduces uncertainty and makes procurement more complicated. Ideally, if a price is quoted—for example, $100 per year—it should remain consistent across a multi-year agreement. Customers would be comfortable committing to a five-year term if the price were fixed and predictable. Unfortunately, that flexibility is currently not available across VMware products, whether it is vSphere, VMware Tanzu solutions, or other offerings. For large enterprise environments, one-year commitments are usually not practical. Many enterprise customers prefer longer-term agreements for budgeting and procurement reasons. Even when they are willing to accept the higher cost associated with the core-based licensing model, the lack of a clear multi-year upfront option often becomes a deal-breaker.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I fully recommend this product, but you need to have some expertise working with JMS and asynchronous tasks."

"Reliable message delivery and mirroring."

"It’s a JMS broker, so the fact that it can allow for asynchronous communication is valuable."

"For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery."

"Depending on the problem, AMQ resolved nearly everything."

"ActiveMQ demonstrates excellent stability and sturdiness."

"The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable."

"ActiveMQ is a great messaging system for synchronizing call and "fire and forget" types of calls."

More ActiveMQ pros

"In summary, this is a good product that I will continue to use, and I recommend it."

"A very good, open-source platform."

"RabbitMQ will help to remove a lot of the complexities and create a loosely coupled codebase."

"I would definitely recommend VMware Tanzu Greenplum; it's open-source and the support is great, and it's also relatively cheap compared to similar solutions."

"The solution's technical support is good."

"Append Only tables, data compression and bulk load and extraction using External Tables are very valuable features for us."

"We have been able to set up a messaging system that facilitates data integration between the software modules that we sell."

"Applying message queues in general has helped my company, BuzzNumber, to scale easily with the load."

Cons

"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."

"It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues."

"I would like the tool to improve compliance and stability. We will encounter issues while using the central applications. In the solution's future releases, I want to control and set limitations for databases."

"Another area of improvement is the monitoring console, which is kind of rudimentary."

"Configuring ActiveMQ brokers for working in a cluster is difficult and has many constraints."

"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 need to enhance stability and improve the deployment optimization to fully leverage the platform's capabilities."

"The included admin web app is not sufficient and we ended up disabling it."

More ActiveMQ cons

"Stability-wise, the consumer needs to configure with caution to make sure the queues never overflow; I have experienced data loss in scenarios in which consumer cases were configured incorrectly."

"Lacks sufficient inbuilt machine-learning functions for complex use cases."

"The implementation of an upgrade takes a long time."

"Some integration with other platforms like design tools, and ETL development tools, that will enable some advanced functionality (like fully down processing, etc.) would be helpful in future releases."

"Temporarily stopping shovels is also not possible in the web interface."

"We had a bit of an issue with stability."

"I would like to see improvements in fluent configuration."

"When you have complex tasks, RabbitMQ is hard to use."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are using the open-source version, so we have not looked at any pricing."

"ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."

"I think the software is free."

"We use the open-source version."

"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."

"It’s open source, ergo free."

"The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."

"There are no fees because it is open-source."

More ActiveMQ pricing and cost advice

"The product is available for free use since it is an open-source technology."

"The price is pretty good."

"Since the tool is an open-source product, there is no need to pay anything."

"We are using the open-source version of this solution."

"The pricing for RabbitMQ is reasonable. It is worth the cost."

"Pricing is good compared to other products. It's fine."

"The solution's pricing is cost-effective as it does not involve significant expenses. Licensing is required only for the server, while clients do not need any licensing. Therefore, it proves to be a cost-efficient option."

"It is an open-source platform. Although, we have to pay for additional features."

More VMware Tanzu Data Solutions pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

26%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

15%

Construction Company

12%

Outsourcing Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	17

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	30
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	50

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 ...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

How does IBM MQ compare with VMware RabbitMQ?

IBM MQ has a great reputation behind it, and this solution is very robust with great stability. It is easy to use, simple to configure and integrates well with our enterprise ecosystem and protocol...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for VMware Tanzu GemFire?

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is that it is a bit expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with VMware Tanzu GemFire?

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM MQ vs ActiveMQ

Compared 50% of the time

Red Hat AMQ vs ActiveMQ

Compared 7% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs ActiveMQ

Compared 6% of the time

PubSub+ Platform vs ActiveMQ

Compared 5% of the time

Amazon SQS vs ActiveMQ

Compared 5% of the time

More ActiveMQ Competitors

Oracle Exadata vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 4% of the time

Teradata vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 4% of the time

Nutanix Database Service vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 4% of the time

Snowflake vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 4% of the time

IBM MQ vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 4% of the time

More VMware Tanzu Data Solutions Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ

June 2026

Download ActiveMQ product report

Buyer's Guide

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

May 2026

Download VMware Tanzu Data Solutions product report

Also Known As

AMQ

Greenplum, Pivotal Greenplum, VMware RabbitMQ, VMware Tanzu GemFire, VMware Postgres

Overview

ActiveMQ is a messaging broker facilitating microservices communication and event management. It supports message queues, Camel routes, and asynchronous communication, enhancing integration capabilities and scalability with a network of brokers.

ActiveMQ efficiently supports message transfer in IoT applications and third-party systems, acting as a hub for code distribution and data flow management. It integrates well with XML and protocols like MQTT, while its fast messaging, reliable delivery, and efficient setup via Docker cater to diverse messaging needs. Though ActiveMQ is cost-effective, challenges exist with scalability, stability, and administration tools. Enhanced documentation and broader protocol support could resolve these issues, improving administration and initial configurations.

What are the key features of ActiveMQ?

Message Queues: Supports efficient queuing systems for distributing messages.
Camel Routes: Facilitates robust routing mechanisms within applications.
High Availability: Ensures reliable service delivery without interruptions.
Asynchronous Communication: Supports real-time interaction across systems.
XML Integration: Provides flexible communication through XML compatibility.
Protocol Support: Works with protocols like MQTT for versatile messaging.
Brokers Network: Enhances scalability with interconnected broker systems.
Docker Setup: Simplifies deployment processes using containerization.

What benefits should users expect from ActiveMQ?

Reliable Delivery: Guarantees messages are delivered promptly and consistently.
Cost-Effectiveness: Ensures affordability for small-scale applications.
Flexible Integration: Offers adaptable messaging solutions with varied systems.
Ease of Setup: Provides straightforward configuration and deployment processes.

ActiveMQ implementation spans industries from IoT, managing device communications and responses, to middleware solutions for payload consumption. It handles registrations and updates, sometimes being used in demonstrations of message broker concepts. Users often leverage it for its message handling efficiency in industry-specific applications.

Apache

VMware Tanzu is a robust platform tailored for data warehousing, complex analytics, BI applications, and predictive analytics. It excels in scalability, performance, and parallel processing, enhancing data handling efficiency. Users report significant productivity improvements and streamlined operations, making it ideal for comprehensive data solutions.

Broadcom

Sample Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc.

General Electric, Conversant, China CITIC Bank, Aridhia, Purdue University

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

June 2026

Free Report: ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions report.

See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.

We monitor all Message Queue (MQ) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.