ActiveMQ vs Red Hat AMQ comparison

Apache and Red Hat are both solutions in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category. Apache is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.5, while Red Hat is ranked #6 with an average rating of 8.0. Apache holds a 22.0% mindshare in MQ, compared to Red Hat’s 8.4% mindshare. Additionally, 89% of Apache users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 90% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

ActiveMQ

Read 28 ActiveMQ reviews

4,376 Views
4,157 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Red Hat AMQ

Read 10 Red Hat AMQ reviews

1,982 Views
1,427 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

ActiveMQ

Red Hat AMQ

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

ActiveMQ and Red Hat AMQ are competing products in the messaging and integration market. Red Hat AMQ generally has an advantage due to its robust support and scalability features.

Features: ActiveMQ provides simplicity and flexibility with multi-protocol support and efficient message filtering. It allows durable subscriptions and features a robust plugin architecture. Red Hat AMQ is recognized for its scalability, advanced security features, and a sophisticated management console, which makes it more suitable for large-scale enterprise deployments.

Room for Improvement: ActiveMQ could enhance its support structures to provide users with more guided assistance. Additionally, improvements in the management console could streamline operations for larger enterprises. Red Hat AMQ might improve pricing structures for smaller businesses and refine documentation to match community support availability and cost-effectiveness of deployment options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat AMQ offers a guided installation process and robust customer support, which facilitates smooth deployment. Conversely, ActiveMQ's straightforward deployment benefits from community support, which may require extra time for troubleshooting but provides flexibility.

Pricing and ROI: ActiveMQ offers a cost-effective solution with minimal setup costs, making it appealing for organizations with budget constraints. The return on investment is substantial for smaller projects. Red Hat AMQ, while having higher initial costs due to its advanced features and support structures, provides long-term ROI benefits for businesses needing a scalable and reliable messaging platform.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveMQ vs. Red Hat AMQ Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ vs. Red Hat AMQ

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,873 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

Red Hat AMQ

Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software

6th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of ActiveMQ is 22.0%, down from 26.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat AMQ is 8.4%, down from 9.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
ActiveMQ	22.0%
Red Hat AMQ	8.4%
Other	69.6%

Message Queue (MQ) Software

Featured Reviews

MoumitaDas

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.

Read full review

SachinJain

Senior Technical Specialist at Intuitive Technology Partners

Efficiently manages high availability and fault tolerance for critical systems with user-friendly management features

I have experience with features such as message persistence and fault tolerance because I configured high availability and fault tolerance for the client environment, including active-active and active-passive configurations. I mainly prefer active-active. I created a security feature for user authentication and authorization in Red Hat AMQ using vault. When you enable the vault, then your whole Red Hat AMQ becomes more secure. Management is straightforward. I configured it and created documentation. The operations team takes care of the operation part. I educate them on how to manage access, so they can easily add new people who join the company or manage the people who leave. The benefits of using Red Hat AMQ include easy configuration and monitoring. On the portal, I can monitor how many packets or alerts have been generated or sent to the end user via Red Hat AMQ along with messages or emails. It also shows utilization in the tool. These features also come with other AMQs such as Amazon and IBM.

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

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the holding and forwarding."

"The initial setup and first deployment of ActiveMQ is fairly simple."

"Most people or many people recommended using ActiveMQ on small and medium-scale applications."

"ActiveMQ demonstrates excellent stability and sturdiness."

"It provides the best support services."

"I appreciate many features including queue, topic, durable topic, and selectors. I also value a different support for different protocols such as MQTT and AMQP. It has full support for EIP, REST, Message Groups, UDP, and TCP."

"The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."

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

More ActiveMQ pros

"The benefits of using Red Hat AMQ include easy configuration and monitoring; on the portal, I can monitor how many packets or alerts have been generated or sent to the end user via Red Hat AMQ along with messages or emails, and it also shows utilization in the tool."

"Red Hat AMQ's best feature is its reliability."

"The most valuable feature is stability."

"The most valuable feature for us is the operator-based automation that is provided by Streams for infrastructure as well as user and topic management. This saves a lot of time and effort on our part to provide infrastructure. For example, the deployment of infrastructure is reduced from approximately a week to a day."

"Reliability is the main criterion for selecting this tool for one of the busiest airports in Mumbai."

"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."

"I can organize the tool with microservices, which allows me to use it across different services. It is easy to learn."

"This product is well adopted on the OpenShift platform. For organizations like ours that use OpenShift for many of our products, this is a good feature."

More Red Hat AMQ pros

Cons

"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."

"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."

"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."

"The tool needs to improve its installation part which is lengthy. The product is already working on that aspect so that the complete installation gets completed within a month."

"The UI. It's both a good thing and a bad thing. The UI is too simple. Sometimes you wanna see the messages coming to the queue, and you have to refresh the dashboard, the console of the product."

"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."

"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."

More ActiveMQ cons

"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."

"AMQ could be better integrated with Jira and patch management tools."

"There are some aspects of the monitoring that could be improved on. There is a tool that is somewhat connected to Kafka called Service Registry. This is a product by Red Hat that I would like to see integrated more tightly."

"The challenge is the multiple components it has. This brings a higher complexity compared to IBM MQ, which is a single complete unit."

"The product needs to improve its documentation and training."

"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."

"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."

"There are several areas in this solution that need improvement, including clustering multi-nodes and message ordering."

More Red Hat AMQ cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is less expensive than its competitors."

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

"I think the software is free."

"It’s open source, ergo free."

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

"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."

"We use the open-source version."

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

More ActiveMQ pricing and cost advice

"There is a subscription needed for this solution and there are support plans available."

"The solution is open-source."

"This is a very cost-effective solution and the pricing is much better than competitors."

"Red Hat AMQ's pricing could be improved."

"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive."

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

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

28%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

20%

Government

10%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software 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	5
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	2

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.

See all answers

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 needs improvement with Red Hat AMQ?

The areas for improvement include cost, which is a primary concern. The deployment process is simple, but the cost is very important. Additionally, the management portal should be more user-friendl...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Red Hat AMQ?

For use cases for Red Hat AMQ, let's take banking purposes. This depends upon the firm or the service or product company. For example, let's take HDFC Bank or any other bank. Whenever a customer de...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat AMQ?

I work primarily with Red Hat. For IBM, I have worked with their channel partner, not directly with IBM. For Amazon, I work with partners only. I am working with one company as a consultant. I also...

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM MQ vs ActiveMQ

Compared 52% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs ActiveMQ

Compared 8% of the time

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions vs ActiveMQ

Compared 5% of the time

Amazon SQS vs ActiveMQ

Compared 5% of the time

PubSub+ Platform vs ActiveMQ

Compared 4% of the time

More ActiveMQ Competitors

Apache Kafka vs Red Hat AMQ

Compared 28% of the time

IBM MQ vs Red Hat AMQ

Compared 14% of the time

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions vs Red Hat AMQ

Compared 11% of the time

IBM Event Streams vs Red Hat AMQ

Compared 6% of the time

Amazon SQS vs Red Hat AMQ

Compared 4% of the time

More Red Hat AMQ Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ

March 2026

Download ActiveMQ product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat AMQ

March 2026

Download Red Hat AMQ product report

Also Known As

AMQ

Red Hat JBoss A-MQ, Red Hat JBoss AMQ

Overview

Apache ActiveMQ is the most popular and powerful open source messaging and Integration Patterns server.

Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License

Apache

To respond to business demands quickly and efficiently, you need a way to integrate the applications and data spread across your enterprise. Red Hat JBoss A-MQ—based on the Apache ActiveMQ open source project—is a flexible, high-performance messaging platform that delivers information reliably, enabling real-time integration and connecting the Internet of Things (IoT).

Red Hat

Sample Customers

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

E*TRADE, CERN, CenturyLink, AECOM, Sabre Holdings

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ vs. Red Hat AMQ

March 2026

Free Report: ActiveMQ vs. Red Hat AMQ

Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveMQ vs. Red Hat AMQ and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ActiveMQ vs. Red Hat AMQ 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.