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

Azul Zing vs IBM WebSphere Message Broker comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 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

Azul Zing
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
11th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
AI Customer Experience Personalization (24th)
IBM WebSphere Message Broker
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of Azul Zing is 2.8%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM WebSphere Message Broker is 3.0%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Infrastructure Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azul Zing2.8%
IBM WebSphere Message Broker3.0%
Other94.2%
Application Infrastructure
 

Featured Reviews

Mohakhan Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Technical Expert at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Real-time charging has stayed consistent and cuts GC incidents while reducing cloud costs
The best features Azul Zing offers include no stop-the-world during the full GC. No stop-the-world pauses during full GC, and we hit higher TPS with fewer JVMs -- a real win for maintenance and cost. As an online charging system, we can't afford crashes or latency spikes. Before Zing, JVMs would hang and drop from the grid on missed heartbeats. GC tuning is also out-of-the-box -- no more time consuming manual tuning like with Oracle/OpenJDK with no significant outcome.
BrajendraKumar - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Architect at HCL Technologies
Offers large-sized business information processing with a time-saving setup and impressive stability
I primarily use two previews of the product for Dev and two for QA as part of the production process. Whatever tools our company is using, the cost of a license in IBM WebSphere Message Broker is about 80% of all these software or tools. The message routing capabilities satisfy workflow efficiency. The product supports message formats of XML, JSON, and SSID, which are around 24 KB to 50 KB in size. The solution supports communication protocols like STTP and TCP. Features like DataGraph need to be introduced in IBM WebSphere Message Broker. Some of the clients of our organization are using an outdated version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker for which the vendor doesn't provide direct support anymore. For the aforementioned version, our company professionals can solve the queries on their own without seeking support from IBM. During the installation of a prior version of IBM WebSphere Message Broker, sometimes I have to configure the failovers through the cluster, where issues arise, and I often seek help from the support team. The solution is being used by some medicine companies in our organization that receive sales orders from the EDR or JDE. I would not recommend the product to others as its becoming obsolete and they can rather choose a middleware solution from Amazon or Azure. But I would overall rate the product a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"With minimal effort, Zing has helped us improve our latency performance dramatically."
"With Zing, we've now been able to re-allocate those tuning resources to general product development."
"No other JVM on the market even comes close to competing with the Azul Zing."
"After using Azul Zing, it is almost a zero-incident situation because of the GCs."
"Zing has completely solved the garbage collection problem for us."
"With minimal effort, Zing has helped us improve our latency performance dramatically."
"GC Pause times are maintained in low milliseconds, which is beneficial for applications with high volume, high memory allocation rate, and a high memory footprint, and it also increases throughput by approximately 20-25% as compared to Oracle Java Development Kit based on some tests that I have done with real applications."
"With minimal effort, Zing has helped us improve our latency performance drastically."
"The transactions and message queuing are the most valuable features of the solution."
"Integration and mapping are easy, which is a major advantage."
"We only use the basic features, but the most valuable one for us is the Publish-subscribe pattern."
"The most valuable features are the product's straightforward development and deployment, and its nice graphical user interface."
"Setup is very easy; we had proper documentation for setup, so it didn't take much time, and setup takes a maximum of two or three hours and I can set up the complete application."
"We are using three or four services in the backend for reformatting messages, and it is straightforward to use."
"The documentation, performance, stability and scalability of the tool are valuable."
"Overall, in comparison to other solutions specific to the banking domain, this product is quite good."
 

Cons

"We have encounter stability issues and that has been a source of frustration at times."
"Although Azul claims to have a fast warmup, we still experience higher latency for the first trade when our system starts up on Sundays."
"However, like every other great product, there is always something that can be improved."
"The profiling tools included with Zing lag behind those available for Oracle's Java implementation."
"It is extremely expensive."
"The licensing over non-production environments considerably affects the cost of our solution as a software vendor."
"Although Azul claims to have a fast warmup, we still experience higher latency for the first trade when our system starts up on Sundays."
"As our business requirements evolve, we require more dynamic capabilities to adapt and scale our services accordingly."
"Technical support is good but they could have a better response time."
"They are expensive and not worth the money we are spending on them."
"I know that Message Broker was a very tightly copied product with another IBM product, that is, IBM MQ. I would like to have a little bit more decoupling from the IBM MQ because it should not be a prerequisite for IBM WebSphere Message Broker usage."
"Stability and pricing are areas with shortcomings that need improvement."
"I find the installation configuration is quite difficult compared to other solutions."
"My biggest complaint about this product is the price."
"The solution can add container engines such as docker."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution is expensive."
"The licensing cost of IBM WebSphere Message Broker needs to be reduced"
"The solution is expensive."
"I feel with IBM, when you want certain functions or features, you have to continuously purchase add-ons. There are always additional fees."
"The price is very high and it's the main reason that we are searching for alternatives."
"IBM software can be costly, but having a contract has helped manage and potentially lower costs over time."
"IBM products are generally more stable and have more features, but also come at a greater cost."
"This product is more expensive than competing products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
12%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azul Zing?
Setup cost isn't significant, the documentation is clear and straightforward, and licensing is simple. I'm not directly involved in pricing negotiations, but given we run it across many production ...
What needs improvement with Azul Zing?
Nothing major, but one nuance: Zing auto-adjusts internal config based on available CPUs, which can cause brief CPU spikes every few minutes. These are harmless, but can give ops/monitoring teams a...
What is your primary use case for Azul Zing?
We run a large in-memory data grid to store millions of customers -- clusters of up to 30-40 JVMs, each with ~90GB heap, deployed across a variety of infrastructure including Azure, AWS, and on-pre...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
WebSphere Message Broker
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Priceline, RBS, Credit Suisse, ING, Creditex, Nielsen, Workday, Saks Fifth Avenue, Entergy, Quotix, Puma and many more.  Visit azul.com for more.
WestJet, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Sharp Corporation, Michelin Tire
Find out what your peers are saying about Azul Zing vs. IBM WebSphere Message Broker and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.