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

Red Hat Fuse 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

Red Hat Fuse
Ranking in Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
26
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 Red Hat Fuse is 6.4%, down from 7.0% 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 (%)
Red Hat Fuse6.4%
TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus4.9%
Other88.7%
Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)
 

Featured Reviews

Nilay Rathod - PeerSpot reviewer
Chapter Area Lead/GM Group Architecture & IT at Spark New Zealand
Microservices have transformed our integrations and now highlight room to improve AI-driven tooling
There are areas in Red Hat Fuse that have room for improvement. We were recently having a discussion with Red Hat team building agentic AI, which we call AI SDLC. Something that the team is actively working on, but I have not really seen any production-level version of it is MCP. For us to use Red Hat Fuse with AI models, we need MCP so that we can be very confident that it can deliver us a really solid outcome when developers are using it, whether it is any of the integration patterns or messaging bus patterns. I have not seen that yet. Even though Red Hat has an alternative to that, such as a plugin, it is not as advanced as some of the MCPs that we see around.
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 most valuable feature is that it's the same as Apache Camel."
"What I like about Red Hat Fuse is that it's a well-established integration software. I find all aspects of the tool positive."
"The support training that comes with the product is amazing."
"The solution is stable. We have gone for months or years without any issue. There are no memory restarts, so from my point of view, it's very stable."
"The process workflow, where we can orchestrate and design the application by defining different routes, is really useful."
"This solution's adaptability to our use case has helped us integrate our systems seamlessly."
"We usually had used PowerCenter for master data integration (by replication). But in some cases, it was better to use Fuse for providing the master data online. It doesn't make it necessary to replicate data."
"The most valuable feature is the software development environment."
"TIBCO has the platform in terms of speed and ease of use."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is that it is a service-oriented architecture, SOA-based."
"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"
"It's very stable and reliable."
"The most valuable features are the monitoring, ease of use, and easy to understand development GUI."
"The product’s most valuable feature is stability."
"The technology is really easy to learn."
 

Cons

"Containerization is one key area where the product can improve"
"The stability of the solution is an area with a shortcoming that needs to be improved."
"Currently, the main point of concern for us is how flexible it is to cater to different requirements. It should be more flexible."
"What could be improved in Red Hat Fuse is the deployment process because it's still very heavy. It's containerized, but now with Spring Boot and other microservices-related containers, deployment is still very heavy. Red Hat Fuse still has room for improvement in terms of becoming more containerized and more oriented."
"The monitoring experience should be better."
"The documentation for Fuse can be improved because, while it is very detailed and extensive, it is not too intuitive for someone that has to deliver some kind of troubleshooting services. In particular, for installation, re-installation, or upgrades, I find that the documentation can be improved."
"For improvement, they can consider the way we collaborate with other applications...Right now, in Red Hat Fuse, everything is not available under one umbrella."
"I don't know the product last versions. I know they are migrating a microservices concepts. We still didn't get there... but we are in the process."
"Issues with the support, the fees, and the termination of the professional services are reasons we are looking for other solutions."
"In the configuration, where we need to customize, it takes more time that we expect it to, ideally."
"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."
"The stability of their latest version is not on par with their classic version 5.X."
"We'd like to see improvements in product support."
"In the next release, there should be improvements made to the API manager."
"The initial setup process could be easier."
"Our version does not have cloud capabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"After doing some Googling and comparisons, the main standouts were MuleSoft and Red Hat Fuse. One of the big factors in our decision to go with Fuse was the licensing cost. It was cheaper to go with Fuse."
"We are paying around $24 million across five years."
"Our license for Red Hat Fuse is around $27,000 per year, which is very expensive."
"In terms of pricing, Red Hat Fuse is a bit expensive because nowadays, if I'm just comparing it with OpenShift with Kubernetes, so Kubernetes and OpenShift, are similar, and Kubernetes is open source, so Red Hat Fuse is quite expensive in terms of support, but Red Hat Fuse provides value for money because it provides good support. If you want to get something, you need to pay for it."
"We found other solutions were more costly."
"You need to pay for the license. It's not free."
"The most important feature of Fuse is the cost. It is open source and a cheap option for an ESB. So, most of the clients in the Middle East and Asian countries prefer this ESB. Other ESBs, like MuleSoft and IBM API Connect, are pretty expensive. Because it is open source, Red Hat Fuse is the cheapest solution, providing almost every integration capability."
"Red Hat Fuse is an expensive tool, though I cannot answer how much it costs as that's confidential."
"The licensing cost is a challenge for quite a few customers."
"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."
"When it comes to cost, TIBCO is much more competitive than a product like Pega."
"Price-wise, I would say that the product is expensive."
"Its licensing cost is considerably high as compared to other ESBs."
"The biggest issue disadvantage of TIBCO is that it 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%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
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 Business4
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Red Hat Fuse?
When considering pricing for Red Hat Fuse, this is a pretty interesting question. When you consider cost, it is not just the cost of the software, but also the cost of development, cost of usage, a...
What needs improvement with Red Hat Fuse?
There are areas in Red Hat Fuse that have room for improvement. We were recently having a discussion with Red Hat team building agentic AI, which we call AI SDLC. Something that the team is activel...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Fuse?
Red Hat Fuse serves as our enterprise integration platform. We do use some of the message bus features as well, but it is not the enterprise message bus.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Fuse ESB, FuseSource
ActiveMatrix Service Bus
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Avianca, American Product Distributors (APD), Kings College Hospital, AMD, CenturyLink, AECOM, E*TRADE
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 Red Hat Fuse vs. TIBCO ActiveMatrix Service Bus and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.