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

IBM Integration Bus vs TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 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

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
TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) category, the mindshare of IBM Integration Bus is 16.7%, down from 22.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus is 4.9%, up from 3.9% 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 Bus16.7%
TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus4.9%
Other78.4%
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

RA
Associate Consultant at MindCraft Software Pvt. Ltd.
Efficient data transformation and seamless integration drive successful deployments
As for improvements in IBM Integration Bus, we are getting another feature of the retry mechanism now. Version 8.13 was upgraded, and we started using the retry mechanism itself, and we are using nodes in the development level. They are improving one of the nodes such as the HTTP request node, implementing the indirect retry mechanism itself, and we are getting new features.
Mustofa Yonus - PeerSpot reviewer
Cheif Specialist- Licensing Systems at Roads & Transport Authority
A robust product that needs to improve the functionality it offers related to API lifecycle management
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a six to seven out of ten. My company consists of around 7000 employees, and we use the solution as an integrated service in around 300 to 400 systems, both internally and externally, making it a huge number. Our company uses the solution every minute and every second, and we can't function without it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The biggest advantage of this solution is that it is very easy to learn, and very easy to build applications."
"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 this SQL database connector So those built in connectors are there. For the almost most of the systems, we have built in connectors. And second thing is that it is a stateless Integration, so it doesn't maintain a state of the integration. Bus the Stitches Integration makes it very fast."
"We've been using IBM Integration Bus for seven years to create a service-oriented architecture in our bank and implement SOAR infrastructure using this tool. It helps us with internal services for core banking and different digital channels. We also use it to expose our services to other banks and companies and consume services from outside our bank using proxy servers."
"It can be implemented as an enterprise service bus to seamlessly connect all applications within your enterprise."
"It is a stable solution."
"One of the most valuable features is App Connect Enterprise makes it possible to deploy it in the OpenShift cluster, which is very good. Overall the solution is very flexible."
"We can have multiple endpoints, and we can integrate different applications from different platforms. In a large-scale enterprise setup, it becomes so easy to establish communication between applications. You can connect an application to other applications, other legacy applications, and databases. You can also connect with those applications that are in the cloud. You can connect with other well-known applications, such as Salesforce, SAP, and Workday, by using IBM Integration Bus."
"like the API lead integration, which is more focused, and I also like real-time integration."
"The most attractive and beneficial feature is the ease of development."
"The most valuable feature is that it is a service-oriented architecture, SOA-based."
"TIBCO has the platform in terms of speed and ease of use."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that the performance is robust."
"The GUI and IDE features of this solution are easy to work with and to develop. We find application management easy using this solution. It is a stable product"
"The solution is very stable."
"It is easy to develop. It has a very wide range of features. The older versions are very stable, and there are no issues with the product."
"It's very stable and reliable."
 

Cons

"Storage capacity of the product should be addressed."
"I would like for them to make the training much easier."
"The memory footprint should be minimized."
"I believe there is room for improvement in the pricing structure to make it more accessible."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"IBM Integration Bus isn't particularly user-friendly and has a big learning curve."
"Technical support is something that should be better."
"We used a third-party vendor, who help us install the solution and it was not easy."
"In the next release, there should be improvements made to the API manager."
"I don't like the product's API management platform, as it doesn't offer users enough functionality to help with API lifecycle management, making it a product that is way behind its competitors."
"The initial setup process could be easier."
"The stability of their latest version is not on par with their classic version 5.X."
"If TIBCO could be able to sort the size of their base image in the Container edition, it would be really marvelous. Right now it's around 299 MB. We'd really want it to reduce to a few MBs."
"The intermediate version that we are using has stability issues. These stability issues should be resolved, but it seems like TIBCO is not focusing on resolving these issues. The resolution timelines are quite high even for high-priority incidents. Its price should be lower. Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."
"Our version does not have cloud capabilities."
"Issues with the support, the fees, and the termination of the professional services are reasons we are looking for other solutions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is reasonable considering the features we receive."
"It is not cheap. It has its cost. It is one of the high-cost solutions."
"As customers, we always try to buy things as cheaply as possible. But the price for the IBM Integration Bus is fine. When we compare it to competitors, it's pretty much the same. However, there are a lot of open-source integration platforms coming to the market as well. So overall, the price is fine as far as licensed products are concerned."
"I generally do not get involved in the licensing or pricing because I'm a hardcore technical guy, but I'm aware of the fact that IBM is highly expensive, so not everybody can afford it. All the products are licensed."
"The maintenance and support of the product are very expensive."
"IBM is expensive."
"IBM provides a quite complicated licensing model."
"Support costs are high compared to the competition. Otherwise, the support is good."
"The licensing cost is a challenge for quite a few customers."
"The biggest issue disadvantage of TIBCO is that it is expensive."
"When it comes to cost, TIBCO is much more competitive than a product like Pega."
"The price is on the higher side. For the same price, if I go to the previous version, I would have got a lot more capacity with similar kinds of features."
"Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."
"Price-wise, I would say that the product is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
9%
Marketing Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise17
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise10
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

IBM WebSphere ESB
ActiveMatrix Service Bus
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Salesbox, €sterreichische Bundesbahnen (€BB), Road Buddy, Swiss Federal Railways, Electricity Supply Board, The Hartree Centre, ESB Networks
Colonial Life, CTBC Bank, New World Mobility, QUALCOMM, Swisscom Mobile, T-Mobile USA, Tata Teleservices, Telecom Italia
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Integration Bus vs. TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.