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

Mule ESB vs SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.2
Mule ESB enhances ROI via integration and reusability despite high licensing costs, scoring 4/5 in user ratings.
Sentiment score
7.2
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite enhances efficiency, reduces headcount, and delivers cost savings through automation and integration, despite initial costs.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.7
Mule ESB offers responsive, quality support, though response times vary, supplementing community assistance with interactive tools like WhatsApp.
Sentiment score
7.4
SEEBURGER's support is reliable with responsive service, though language and time-zone issues may affect personalization and customization speed.
The technical support of Mule ESB can be rated from nine to ten.
The support provided by SEEBURGER is excellent.
I would rate my experience with the technical support of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite as 10 out of 10.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Mule ESB is highly scalable, excelling in cloud deployments and handling high usage with robust performance across industries.
Sentiment score
7.4
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite excels in scalability and flexibility, easily adapting to various business needs with cloud integration.
Mule ESB is a scalable solution.
The scalability depends primarily on the mapping itself, as the connection and file flow are in the cloud.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
Mule ESB is generally rated highly for stability, though some issues arise in specific cases like clustering and cloud use.
Sentiment score
8.0
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite offers reliable stability, minimal issues, swift error handling, and near-perfect uptime with responsive support.
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is a very stable product, and I haven't noticed any significant drawbacks.
I would rate the stability of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite as 9 out of 10.
 

Room For Improvement

Mule ESB faces issues with usability, stability, high costs, and lacks comprehensive documentation and effective support services.
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite needs interface simplification, enhanced monitoring, better documentation, and improved cloud integration and cost models.
More information is needed from MuleSoft.
This requires restarting the application to update the IP address, which is an issue from the SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite vendor side.
Acquiring training documents on a public domain for SEEBURGER is challenging.
 

Setup Cost

Mule ESB's enterprise licensing is complex and costly, favoring large enterprises, while smaller companies might seek alternatives.
SEEBURGER's flexible licensing and comprehensive features offer competitive pricing, justifying its cost despite complexity for many organizations.
Regarding the pricing of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, I would rate it as 7 out of 10.
 

Valuable Features

Mule ESB provides extensive connectivity, data transformation, and easy integration, supporting scalable, efficient deployments for organizations of all sizes.
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite offers platform independence, strong EDI automation, seamless SAP integration, scalability, and comprehensive global B2B integration.
They have their own language called DataWeave, which helps transform data and is efficient enough to handle any kind of transformation.
It comes pre-loaded with solutions, meaning it is ready to use without requiring significant development.
When comparing to other applications, SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is the easiest way to understand the application.
 

Categories and Ranking

Mule ESB
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (2nd)
SEEBURGER Business Integrat...
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (6th), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (14th), API Management (25th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Application Integration solutions, they serve different purposes. Mule ESB is designed for Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) and holds a mindshare of 20.4%, down 22.2% compared to last year.
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, on the other hand, focuses on Business-to-Business Middleware, holds 10.4% mindshare, up 7.9% since last year.
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
Business-to-Business Middleware
 

Featured Reviews

PurbayanSaha - PeerSpot reviewer
Has API-led architecture and provides a unique, user-friendly, and scalable architecture for hosting APIs
There's room for improvement in multi-file transfer functionality. It's not convenient when using MuleSoft, and it should have better capability for handling large amounts of data. For example, applications like GoAnywhere can handle huge chunks of data, so the tool should also have something to facilitate that aspect of integration.
VARUNKUMAR - PeerSpot reviewer
Great end-to-end integration, data mapping, and communication protocols
At this moment, everything is working fine. When we are talking to them, when we are trying to bring all this mapping in-house, right now, SEEBURGER is doing everything for us. However, when we are thinking of going onto the cloud, so they are not using any of AWS or Azure which are more stable. They have their own private cloud. That's the reason we did not go ahead with managing everything by ourselves or moving into the cloud. They said that they're going to be doing it within the next two years, having access to Azure and AWS. That would be something we would like to see.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 Mule ESB?
The solution's drag-and-drop interface and data viewer helped us quite a lot.
What do you like most about SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is a highly stable solution that offers rich features for our B2B integration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
I've heard that the solution is cheaper when compared to other products in the market.
What needs improvement with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
Overall, SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is a robust and standard product. However, providing more training materials, especially when new products are released, would be beneficial. Acquiring...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SEEBURGER BIS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ube, PacificComp, University of Witwatersrand, Justice Systems, Camelot
Altis, Autoliv, Cebi, Cofresco, MoneyGram International, Samsonite Europe, VSP Global, BMW Group, OSRAM, Magna, Lavazza
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Salesforce, Oracle and others in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB). Updated: April 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.