TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Amazon Kinesis

    Score9.9 out of 10
    N/AAmazon Kinesis is a streaming analytics suite for data intake from video or other disparate sources and applying analytics for machine learning (ML) and business intelligence.

    $0.01

    per GB data ingested / consumed

    Apache Kafka

    Score8.9 out of 10
    N/AApache Kafka is an open-source stream processing platform developed by the Apache Software Foundation written in Scala and Java. The Kafka event streaming platform is used by thousands of companies for high-performance data pipelines, streaming analytics, data integration, and mission-critical applications.N/A

    IBM MQ

    Score9 out of 10
    N/AIBM MQ (formerly WebSphere MQ and MQSeries) is messaging middleware.N/A
    Pricing
    Amazon KinesisApache KafkaIBM MQ
    Editions & Modules
    Amazon Kinesis Video Streams
    $0.00850
    per GB data ingested / consumed
    Amazon Kinesis Data Streams
    $0.04
    per hour per stream
    Amazon Kinesis Data Analytics
    $0.11
    per hour
    Amazon Kinesis Data Firehose
    tiered pricing starting at $0.029
    per month first 500 TB ingested
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Amazon KinesisApache KafkaIBM MQ
    Free Trial
    NoNoYes
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNoYes
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details———
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    Amazon KinesisApache KafkaIBM MQ
    Considered Multiple Products
    Amazon AWS
    Chose Amazon Kinesis
    The main benefit was around set up - incredibly easy to just start using Kinesis. Kinesis is a real-time data processing platform, while Kafka is more of a message queue system. If you only need a message queue from a limited source, Kafka may do the job. More complex use …
    Incentivized
    Apache
    Chose Apache Kafka
    Apache Kafka is open-sourced, scales great has cloud agnostics and performs better than Amazon Kinesis [in my view]. Amazon Kinesis has some limitations and vendor lockin is not something I [like]. With Confluent operators you can easily install it on a kubernetes cluster.
    Incentivized
    Chose Apache Kafka
    Confluent Cloud is still based on Apache Kafka but it has a subscription fee so, from a long term perspective, it is wiser to deploy your own Kafka instance that spans public and private cloud. Amazon Kinesis, Google Cloud Pub/Sub do not do well for a very number of messages …
    Incentivized
    Chose Apache Kafka
    - The biggest advantage of using Apache Kafka is that it is cloud agnostic - It handles super high volume, is fault tolerance, high performance
    Incentivized
    Chose Apache Kafka
    Kafka is simple and lower in price.
    Incentivized
    Chose Apache Kafka
    Kafka is faster and more scalable, also "free" as opensource (albeit we deploy using a commercial distribution). Infrastructure tends to be cheaper. On the other hand, projects must adapt to Kafka APIs that sometimes change and BAU increases until a major 1.x version comes out …
    Incentivized
    IBM
    Chose IBM MQ
    I've also used Apache Kafka and RabbitMQ. Compared to these, IBM MQ offers superior reliability and transactional integrity, making it a better choice for complex, mission-critical enterprise environments where message delivery and security are paramount. We chose IBM MQ for …
    Incentivized
    Chose IBM MQ
    Apache Kafka may be a better option in comparison with IBM MQ its real-time data streaming and large data payload service. It depends upon the specific requirement and meets those needs. MuleSoft any point platform is very easy to connect to various other types of platforms in …
    Incentivized
    Chose IBM MQ
    Kafka is renowned for its impressive throughput, fault tolerance, and real-time data streaming capabilities. Nonetheless, IBM MQ remains the preferred choice due to its unwavering commitment to guaranteed delivery and exceptional reliability. Fault-Tolerant Architectures of IBM …
    Incentivized
    Chose IBM MQ
    Nothing like MQ . The backbone of the banking industry or any other area . however most of the rivals are light weight and integration is easy .
    Incentivized
    Chose IBM MQ
    Compared to other products this is one with a budget.
    Incentivized
    Chose IBM MQ
    We found IBM MQ very easy to get started and quick to learn by the new users with a short learning curve and seamlessly integrates with IBM products, and quick to perform self-service analytics and make informed business decisions. IBM MQ is also very straightforward in …
    Incentivized
    Chose IBM MQ
    IBM MQ is very stable and a proven product compared to other Messaging platforms available. Performance was better than WSO2 product and also the RabbitMQ. Though Kafka and IBM MQ is not directly comparable, Kafka is more suited for event based systems and also where there is …
    Incentivized
    Chose IBM MQ
    IBM MQ is the product for inter-business communication for security, flexibility and scalability.
    Incentivized
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    No answers on this topic
    94%
    Would buy again
    16 Answers
    100%
    Would buy again
    42 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    No answers on this topic
    94%
    Delivers good value for the price
    16 Answers
    98%
    Delivers good value for the price
    40 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    No answers on this topic
    94%
    Happy with the feature set
    16 Answers
    100%
    Happy with the feature set
    42 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    13 Answers
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    32 Answers
    Implementation went as expected
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    17 Answers
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    39 Answers
    Features
    Amazon KinesisApache KafkaIBM MQ
    Streaming Analytics
    Comparison of Streaming Analytics features of Amazon Kinesis and Apache Kafka and IBM MQ
    Feature
    Amazon Kinesis
    8.3
    2 Ratings
    6% above category average
    Apache Kafka
    -
    Ratings
    IBM MQ
    -
    Ratings
    Real-Time Data Analysis10.01 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
    Data Ingestion from Multiple Data Sources9.02 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
    Low Latency9.02 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
    Integrated Development Tools9.02 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
    Data wrangling and preparation10.01 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
    Linear Scale-Out6.12 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
    Data Enrichment5.01 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Amazon KinesisApache KafkaIBM MQ
    Small Businesses
    Google Cloud Dataflow
    Score9.1 out of 10
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Medium-sized Companies
    No answers on this topic
    IBM MQ
    Score9 out of 10
    Apache Kafka
    Score8.9 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Spotfire Streaming
    Score5 out of 10
    TIBCO Messaging
    Score7.7 out of 10
    Apache Kafka
    Score8.9 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Amazon KinesisApache KafkaIBM MQ
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.0
    (3 ratings)
    8.0
    (19 ratings)
    10.0
    (48 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.0
    (2 ratings)
    9.1
    (1 ratings)
    Usability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (2 ratings)
    9.1
    (7 ratings)
    Availability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.5
    (29 ratings)
    Support Rating
    7.1
    (2 ratings)
    8.4
    (4 ratings)
    9.1
    (27 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Amazon KinesisApache KafkaIBM MQ
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Amazon AWS
    Amazon Kinesis is a great replacement for Kafka and it works better whenever the components of the solution are AWS based. Best if extended fan-out is not required, but still price-performance ratio is very good for simplifying maintenance.
    I would go with a different option if the systems to be connected are legacy, for instance in the case of traditional messaging clients.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Apache
    Apache Kafka is well-suited for most data-streaming use cases. Amazon Kinesis and Azure EventHubs, unless you have a specific use case where using those cloud PaAS for your data lakes, once set up well, Apache Kafka will take care of everything else in the background. Azure EventHubs, is good for cross-cloud use cases, and Amazon Kinesis - I have no real-world experience. But I believe it is the same.
    Read full review
    IBM
    In the context of Internet of Things (IoT) applications, IBM MQ plays a pivotal role in managing the substantial data streams emanating from interconnected devices. Its primary function is to guarantee the dependable transmission and processing of data, catering to a diverse range of IoT use cases, including but not limited to smart city initiatives, healthcare monitoring systems, and industrial automation solutions. In the telecommunications sector, IBM MQ is employed for message routing, call detail record (CDR) processing, and network management to ensure real-time data exchange and fault tolerance. When managing the supply chain and logistics, IBM MQ is used to ensure timely and accurate communication between different entities, including suppliers, warehouses, and transportation providers. IBM MQ can be cost-prohibitive for smaller organizations due to licensing and maintenance costs. In such cases, open-source or lightweight messaging solutions may be more appropriate. For scenarios requiring extremely low-latency, real-time data exchange, and high throughput, other messaging technologies, like Apache Kafka, may be more suitable due to their specialized design for such use cases.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Amazon AWS
    • Processing huge loads of data
    • Integrating well with IoT Platform on Amazon
    • Integration with overall AWS Ecosystem
    • Scalability
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Apache
    • Really easy to configure. I've used other message brokers such as RabbitMQ and compared to them, Kafka's configurations are very easy to understand and tweak.
    • Very scalable: easily configured to run on multiple nodes allowing for ease of parallelism (assuming your queues/topics don't have to be consumed in the exact same order the messages were delivered)
    • Not exactly a feature, but I trust Kafka will be around for at least another decade because active development has continued to be strong and there's a lot of financial backing from Confluent and LinkedIn, and probably many other companies who are using it (which, anecdotally, is many).
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • The documentation is very clear,It is understandable and the support helps to configure it in the best way.
    • Server guidelines make it possible to get the most out of work management. It's broad, we can work with different operating systems, I really recommend using linux.
    • It is highly compatible with systems, brockers, applications, and data accumulation programs, it is possible to configure everything so that after the installation of programs, they can communicate with each other and then throw data to an external program that accumulates it and represents in clear details of steps to follow and make business decisions.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Amazon AWS
    • Not a queue system, so little visibility into "backlog" if there is any
    • Confusing terminology to make sure events aren't missed
    • Sometimes didn't seem to trigger Lambda functions, or dropped events when a lot came in
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Apache
    • Sometimes it becomes difficult to monitor our Kafka deployments. We've been able to overcome it largely using AWS MSK, a managed service for Apache Kafka, but a separate monitoring dashboard would have been great.
    • Simplify the process for local deployment of Kafka and provide a user interface to get visibility into the different topics and the messages being processed.
    • Learning curve around creation of broker and topics could be simplified
    Read full review
    IBM
    • There is limitation on number of svrconn connections you can have to MQ on the mainframe which has been an major issue for us. This has been an issue for us for over 4 years and still no fix although I am aware IBM have been working on a solution over the last year.
    • When upgrading to MQ V9.3 on our MQ appliances there is no fall-back option. This was the same for MQ V9.2 upgrade from MQ V9.0. For production upgrades this I believe is not acceptable.
    • AMS is not supplied as part of the standard mainframe MQ licence. You need an extra licence. IBM tell customers how important security and protecting data is yet they still want to charge for this software. The cost of MQ on the mainframe is not cheap so I would expect AMS to be part of the base product.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Amazon AWS
    No answers on this topic
    Apache
    Kafka is quickly becoming core product of the organization, indeed it is replacing older messaging systems. No better alternatives found yet
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    No answers on this topic
    Usability
    Amazon AWS
    No answers on this topic
    Apache
    Apache Kafka is highly recommended to develop loosely coupled, real-time processing applications. Also, Apache Kafka provides property based configuration. Producer, Consumer and broker contain their own separate property file
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    I give it a nine because it has significantly improved my team's data reliability and operational efficiency. Its great security features give us peace of mind, knowing our sensitive data is well protected. While the setup might initially be complex, I believe the long-term benefits far outweigh this hurdle.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Reliability and Availability
    Amazon AWS
    No answers on this topic
    Apache
    No answers on this topic
    IBM
    The messages are delivered instantly with this software and it integrates with our technology stack, in terms of availability we only had one failure when we were doing some testing and integration with third parties, the features of this software make it always available and its deployment is easy for the company, it does not generate expenses due to failures
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Amazon AWS
    The documentation was confusing and lacked examples. The streams suddenly stopped working with no explanation and there was no information in the logs. All these were more difficult when dealing with enhanced fan-out. In fact, we were about to abort the usage of Kinesis due to a misunderstanding with enhanced fan-out.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Apache
    Support for Apache Kafka (if willing to pay) is available from Confluent that includes the same time that created Kafka at Linkedin so they know this software in and out. Moreover, Apache Kafka is well known and best practices documents and deployment scenarios are easily available for download. For example, from eBay, Linkedin, Uber, and NYTimes.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    There are very specific things that must be elevated to more specialized areas of support, but the common support is very agile when receiving questions or when we leave concerns in real time. I recommend the support of the program in this regard.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Amazon AWS
    The main benefit was around set up - incredibly easy to just start using Kinesis. Kinesis is a real-time data processing platform, while Kafka is more of a message queue system. If you only need a message queue from a limited source, Kafka may do the job. More complex use cases, with low latency, higher volume of data, real time decisions and integration with multiple sources and destination at a decent price, Kinesis is better.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Apache
    I used other messaging/queue solutions that are a lot more basic than Confluent Kafka, as well as another solution that is no longer in the market called Xively, which was bought and "buried" by Google. In comparison, these solutions offer way fewer functionalities and respond to other needs.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    We found IBM MQ very easy to get started and quick to learn by the new users with a short learning curve and seamlessly integrates with IBM products, and quick to perform self-service analytics and make informed business decisions. IBM MQ is also very straightforward in creating simple and best reports, which are very profitable and productive.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Amazon AWS
    • Caused us to need to re-engineer some basic re-try logic
    • Caused us to drop some content without knowing it
    • Made monitoring much more difficult
    • We eventually switched back to SQS because Kinesis is not the same as a Queue system
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Apache
    • Positive: Get a quick and reliable pub/sub model implemented - data across components flows easily.
    • Positive: it's scalable so we can develop small and scale for real-world scenarios
    • Negative: it's easy to get into a confusing situation if you are not experienced yet or something strange has happened (rare, but it does). Troubleshooting such situations can take time and effort.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    IBM
    • Positive- Message Reliability and Reduced downtime, increases the ROI many times.
    • Positive- Increased stability and enhanced customer experience
    • Negative- cost is very high - Both licensing and integration cost
    • Negative- Learning and training cost of IBM MQ is high as its complex to use and integrate
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots