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

IBM Integration Bus vs JBoss ESB comparison

 

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

IBM Integration Bus
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
70
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
JBoss ESB
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
8th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of IBM Integration Bus is 20.4%, down from 22.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of JBoss ESB is 3.4%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM Integration Bus20.4%
JBoss ESB3.4%
Other76.2%
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

Ashraf Siddiqui - PeerSpot reviewer
Helpful for complex integrations because it has tools and functionality to integrate with other systems
Everything needs to be improved. As far as integration and the cloud are concerned, things are moving to the cloud side. When you use Kubernetes and similar technologies, IBM Integration Bus doesn't greatly facilitate these environments. Maybe I don't know enough about that, but I feel that when it comes to the DevOps environment, the tool needs to be deployed on production in a way that's just like pods. Cloud integration needs to be more facilitated with the DevOps environment. This IBM technology needs to adapt because in the recent world, in the real world, we see that everything is just a cloud pod. Whenever you need to scale anything, you just put some cloud and pod and improve it, make any server and deploy it. But in IBM Integration Bus, there is a problem because we can't do this as easily. In short, IBM needs to more emphasize or more integrate with the cloud environments as well, similar to DevOps. There are limitations in IBM Integration Bus when it comes to DevOps.
AU
Efficient orchestration and security features improve business processes effortlessly
JBoss ESB should focus on startup and performance as EAP is heavier than lightweight Java frameworks, which impacts microservices and cloud environments. Improvements should include faster start times and reduced memory footprints. Better cold-start performance in containers should be emphasized. Cloud-native features must be enhanced since many enterprises are shifting to Kubernetes and OpenShift, making EAP more cloud-friendly. This could include providing smaller container images, native auto-scaling support, and improved integration with cloud configuration services. Enhancing the developer experience is crucial; while the current configuration is powerful, it can be complex for newcomers. As an experienced user, I navigate it easily, but newcomers struggle due to heavy reliance on XML configuration. Transitioning to a JSON-based configuration or YAML format would be beneficial, and simplifications in clustering setup for local testing would greatly assist users.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We use IBM Integration Bus for document conversions."
"IBM Integration Bus has been effective in facilitating our messaging and service-oriented architecture (SOA) or bus architecture. So, we're already utilizing it to transform the data from the source it's sending. It converts the data from the format the source sends it into the format the destination system requires. So we are transforming the messages, which are required by the destination system; that's the one way."
"The solution offers good performance and is stable."
"It is user-friendly and a value-added tool for banks and other verticals."
"The most valuable features of the IBM Integration Bus are flexibility. It's also an alternative for integrating it with other projects, which we are not ready at this time to do, such as switching to tunnels. The tunnels would be used with other partners to make sure everything is secured."
"This solution is very reliable and it is easy to learn."
"The most valuable features of the IBM Integration Bus are the flexibility to easily integrate with other solutions, such as SAP or any other vendors."
"It makes the communication between multiple and heterogeneous applications so easy. We can bring together different messages and applications from different platforms and connect them through IBM Integration Bus."
"The solution is very easy to use. I can download the trial version and just give it a go."
 

Cons

"The performance needs to be enhanced when working with the Toolkit."
"The solution could improve by having built-in implementation and secure monitoring without the need for API Connect."
"Migrating to this solution is complex and it would be helpful if they had a way to convert existing integrations."
"I can't say that there is any improvement I’m looking for. I’m new and haven’t connected with all features. For all drawbacks that were in the old version, I think they have been solved. The scalability needs improvement."
"Session management can sometimes hand forcing server reboots."
"This solution would benefit from improvements to the configuration interface."
"Everything needs to be improved. As far as integration and the cloud are concerned, things are moving to the cloud side. When you use Kubernetes and similar technologies, IBM Integration Bus doesn't greatly facilitate these environments. Maybe I don't know enough about that, but I feel that when it comes to the DevOps environment, the tool needs to be deployed on production in a way that's just like pods."
"The solution is complex and there is a need for more resources and greatly improved quality."
"JBoss ESB should focus on startup and performance as EAP is heavier than lightweight Java frameworks, which impacts microservices and cloud environments."
"The EPA, from what I understand, lacks a lot of features and it doesn't really know how to interface with legacy systems or how to develop APIs for legacy systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM Integration Bus itself is prices fair but App-Connect is a bit expensive which we use in conjunction with it."
"It is a highly-priced solution."
"IBM Integration Bus is expensive. There are cheaper products in the marketplace."
"The licensing model of IBM Integration Bus is good. It's a yearly subscription. However, the price is depending on the model that you choose. If it's a Cloud version, then you can pay per month or you can pay it annually upfront. There are three-year options available, but it depends on what deployment you have."
"The pricing could be improved to make it more competitive."
"It is not cheap. It has its cost. It is one of the high-cost solutions."
"Our licensing is based on a five-year contract, and as far as I know, there are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fee."
"The price of the license could be cheaper."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise17
Large Enterprise47
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Migration from IBM Integration Bus to Mulesoft ESB for a large enterprise tech services company
I was previously part of the Oracle SOA/OSB development team. In my current capacity I architected solutions using MuleSoft Anypoint Platform on cloud / on-premises and hybrid modes and on PCE/RTF ...
IBM Integration Bus vs Mule ESB - which to choose?
Our team ran a comparison of IBM’s Integration Bus vs. Mule ESB in order to determine what sort of ESB software was the best fit for our organization. Ultimately we decided to choose IBM Integratio...
What do you like most about IBM Integration Bus?
The message queue, like, message queue connectors. Then they have a built in connectors for most of the systems, like SAP, oracle database, and this Civil connector is there. Of course, we have thi...
What needs improvement with JBoss ESB?
JBoss ESB should focus on startup and performance as EAP is heavier than lightweight Java frameworks, which impacts microservices and cloud environments. Improvements should include faster start ti...
What advice do you have for others considering JBoss ESB?
I am currently using JBoss ESB as an end user. I chose JBoss ESB because it is excellent for open source Java, Java EE, and Jakarta applications. Initially developed by JBoss, it was later acquired...
What is your primary use case for JBoss ESB?
I used JBoss ESB for banking API and banking software. We created our own modules since banking APIs and banking applications require extensive security measures. Since banks handle sensitive finan...
 

Also Known As

IBM WebSphere ESB
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Salesbox, €sterreichische Bundesbahnen (€BB), Road Buddy, Swiss Federal Railways, Electricity Supply Board, The Hartree Centre, ESB Networks
Rancore, Sprint, ResMed, Brazil's Ministry of Health, ING Services Polska
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Integration Bus vs. JBoss ESB and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
868,759 professionals have used our research since 2012.