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

Amazon MQ 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

Amazon MQ
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software (9th)
Apache Kafka
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Amazon MQ and Apache Kafka aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Amazon MQ is designed for Message Queue (MQ) Software and holds a mindshare of 3.9%, up 3.8% 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 (%)
Amazon MQ3.9%
IBM MQ21.3%
ActiveMQ20.0%
Other54.8%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache Kafka3.6%
Databricks7.4%
Apache Flink7.0%
Other82.0%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

RamilCerrada - PeerSpot reviewer
Solution architect at SM Supermalls
Has provided consistent functionality across on-premise and cloud while simplifying cloud integration
I have experience with on-premise setups using ActiveMQ and RabbitMQ, but with regards to AWS, I use it via cloud only. There's a free tier with Amazon MQ based on their website, which is a six-month free trial of a single instance, allowing per month usage of either ActiveMQ or RabbitMQ, five gig of Amazon EFS storage, and for ActiveMQ, it's 20 gig of Amazon EBS storage for RabbitMQ. I did not purchase Amazon MQ through AWS Marketplace. Amazon MQ has published information about having 650 hours of free trial usage. This can be found via the AWS website by searching for AWS MQ. On a scale of one to ten, I rate Amazon MQ an eight out of ten.
Amandeep Pawar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at Airy 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

"The initial Amazon MQ setup is very easy both when you do it on your own or use the self-managed instance."
"Since we utilize AWS, it's easy to integrate Amazon MQ and work with other third-party software, as they have standard communications via API or native language."
"Amazon MQ is a secure solution."
"Amazon MQ is managed by AWS and is easy to use."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its managed service aspect. It's simple to implement and use. It requires minimal effort to maintain business operations."
"Amazon MQ is a very scalable solution."
"Amazon MQ is important for being collaborative, allowing for centralized information."
"We have found Amazon MQ to provide scalability, robustness, and security."
"Apache Kafka has helped our client's online restaurant company by allowing them to take any orders and send the notifications with some other details, such as logic commands, to the different microservices."
"It eases our current data flow and framework."
"In our current position, we use it to move a lot of data and I think it's definitely working well."
"The convenience in setting up after major problems like data center blackouts is a notable feature."
"The solution is stable, and the most fantastic thing about it is its throughput."
"Excellent speeds for publishing messages faster."
"When starting out with minimal hardware, Kafka has a guaranteed delivery mechanism that is very easy to set up and can handle very large data volumes, helping to speed up the timeline from prototype all the way to production volumes."
"With Kafka, events and streaming are persistent, and multiple subscribers can consume the data. This is an advantage of Kafka compared to simple queue-based solutions."
 

Cons

"Depending on your use cases, Amazon MQ can be cheap or expensive."
"Amazon MQ is a good solution for small and medium-sized enterprises. It's open-source software, which means it's cheaper than its competitors."
"On a scale of one to 10, one being the best and 10 being the worst, I would give Amazon MQ an eight for overall performance."
"The solution needs improvement in the back end and security."
"In community support, especially with distributed systems and integration, there is a need for better system organization."
"The product should improve its monitoring capabilities. It needs to improve the pricing also."
"Amazon MQ isn't a cheap tool."
"Monitoring capabilities are not yet fully developed, since it's a message broker service, so it focuses more on the health of Apache."
"The UI is based on command line. It would be helpful if they could come up with a simpler user interface."
"Apache Kafka has performance issues that cause it to lag."
"Some vendors don't offer extra features for monitoring."
"Stability of the API and the technical support could be improved."
"The third party is not very stable and sometimes you have problems with this component. There are some developments in newer versions and we're about to try them out, but I'm not sure if it closes the gap."
"Config management can be better."
"Too much dependency on the zookeeper and leader selection is still the bottleneck for Kafka implementation."
"The manageability should be improved. There are lots of things we need to manage and it should have a function that enables us to manage them all cohesively."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As a client or as an end user, I would say that Google Cloud Storage or Google Cloud are cheaper than Amazon MQ."
"Depending on your use cases, Amazon MQ can be cheap or expensive."
"Kafka is more reasonably priced than IBM MQ."
"It is open source software."
"The solution is open source."
"We use the free version."
"It's a bit cheaper compared to other Q applications."
"Apache Kafka is open-source and can be used free of charge."
"When starting to look at a distributed message system, look for a cloud solution first. It is an easier entry point than an on-premises hardware solution."
"Kafka is an open-source solution, so there are no licensing costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
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 Business2
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise51
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon MQ?
Amazon MQ needs to have data collected on performance to analyze trends for improvement. Additionally, some tools can suggest how to improve performance in terms of speed, time, and processing, whi...
What is your primary use case for Amazon MQ?
I have some experience working with Amazon MQ.
What advice do you have for others considering Amazon MQ?
I have experience with on-premise setups using ActiveMQ and RabbitMQ, but with regards to AWS, I use it via cloud only. There's a free tier with Amazon MQ based on their website, which is a six-mon...
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

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

SkipTheDishes, Malmberg, Dealer.com, Bench Accounting
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.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.