Apache Camel vs. Mule ESB

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Camel
Score 6.5 out of 10
N/A
Apache Camel is an open source integration platform.N/A
Mule ESB
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Mule ESB, from Mulesoft, is an open source middleware solution.N/A
Pricing
Apache CamelMule ESB
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache CamelMule ESB
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CamelMule ESB
Considered Both Products
Apache Camel

No answer on this topic

Mule ESB
Chose Mule ESB
It doesn't have API . We have to go for another API manager. But in Mule, it has both API manager and ESB
Top Pros
Top Cons
TrustRadius Insights
Apache CamelMule ESB
Highlights

TrustRadius
Research Team Insight
Published

Apache Camel and Mule ESB are both integration platforms designed to help developers create connections between different pieces of software. Both platforms are open-source, but they differ significantly in their implementation of the open-source model. Apache Camel is a free standalone program supported solely by its community of developers. Mule ESB is the runtime engine of MuleSoft’s Anypoint Platform, a licensed and professionally-supported product. Both products are primarily used by enterprise-level organizations, who have more time, budget, and business need for custom-built integrations when compared to smaller companies..

Features

Although both Apache Camel and Mule ESB allow developers to create customized software integrations, their user interfaces and architecture are very different.

Apache Camel uses a code-based interface that will be familiar to most developers with experience writing code. Users can create their integrations in a variety of languages, including XML configuration files and domain-specific languages (DSLs). Apache Camel has a robust developer community with a wide array of accumulated experience, skills, and tutorials available. And with a free license, Apache Camel has the lowest possible upfront cost, requiring no purchase to start using.

Mule ESB, on the other hand, has the backing and support of a professional company. Besides traditional customer support, MuleSoft offers dedicated architects that can consult and assist with implementation and development. The software uses a quickly-learnable visual interface and includes quality-of-life and convenience features to help new developers get started. Customers also report that MuleSoft is responsive to customer feedback and general trends in the integration world, releasing relevant, helpful updates to their platform.

Limitations

With such different user experiences, it’s natural that Apache Camel and Mule ESB won’t be suitable for every developer or business. Be sure to take their limitations into account before choosing one or the other.

Apache Camel’s text-based development may be comfortable for experienced developers, but it can obfuscate the learning process for new users, especially if they’re just getting started in integration development. Since Apache Camel is free and relies on the open-source community for support, developers must spend time and energy building proficiency in the software, and a business will need to keep in-house experts to maintain and develop integrations.

Mule ESB, as a licensed product, can be costly. The cost of licensing compounds with the price of advanced technical support, especially if your business requires a dedicated architect to assist with setup and development. And an architect might be necessary: some users with advanced requirements reported that initial setup was complicated and difficult, and that mis-configuration could cause significant development problems. Finally, the platform can sometimes suffer from unexplained slowdowns and general instability, and is difficult to troubleshoot.

Pricing

Apache Camel is offered as open-source software under the Apache License 2.0 and can be downloaded for free.

MuleSoft ESB is included with MuleSoft’s Anypoint Platform, which uses a tiered annual subscription pricing model. The Gold tier offers the Mule ESB runtime engine and visual design tools. The Platinum tier increases customer support priority, adds enterprise-level functionality such as cloud deployment, SSO, and role-based permissions. The Titanium tier offers the maximum customer support priority, data analysis features, and advanced logging and tracing tools. Specific pricing details are available via a quote from MuleSoft.

Best Alternatives
Apache CamelMule ESB
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
Anypoint Platform
Anypoint Platform
Score 8.1 out of 10
Anypoint Platform
Anypoint Platform
Score 8.1 out of 10
Enterprises
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
Score 8.5 out of 10
Anypoint Platform
Anypoint Platform
Score 8.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CamelMule ESB
Likelihood to Recommend
7.8
(11 ratings)
9.8
(5 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CamelMule ESB
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
Message brokering across different systems, with transactionality and the ability to have fine tuned control over what happens using Java (or other languages), instead of a heavy, proprietary languages. One situation that it doesn't fit very well (as far as I have experienced) is when your workflow requires significant data mapping. While possible when using Java tooling, some other visual data mapping tools in other integration frameworks are easier to work with.
Read full review
Salesforce
If you’re bringing anything into Salesforce you should just invest now into Mule, you will get your money’s worth and find a myriad of uses to build APIs between many other systems. Once you build a component you can easily reuse it as a building block to attach to another source/destination. This makes it easy to ramp up quickly and spread usage of Mule throughout your enterprise. A good value for medium to large companies, but probably cheaper to outsource your job to a consulting firm if you are smaller.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Camel has an easy learning curve. It is fairly well documented and there are about 5-6 books on Camel.
  • There is a large user group and blogs devoted to all things Camel and the developers of Camel provide quick answers and have also been very quick to patch Camel, when bugs are reported.
  • Camel integrates well with well known frameworks like Spring, and other middleware products like Apache Karaf and Servicemix.
  • There are over 150 components for the Camel framework that help integrate with diverse software platforms.
  • Camel is also good for creating microservices.
Read full review
Salesforce
  • It is best suited for Rest API development. Mule ESB uses RAML as an API descriptor which is less complex and easy to understand. RAML is an open standard majorly supported by Mulesoft. Once RAML is developed, it is very easy (a few clicks)to create flows corresponding to the resources defined in the RAML. One can also include JSON schema validation in RAML, and with the use of APIkit router, Mule ESB makes the request validation very easy (it's automatic basically.)
  • Mule ESB comes with a large spectrum of community and enterprise connectors. We have connectors for all the major platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Salesforce, SAP, etc. This enables Mule ESB to integrate with the other systems in a faster and more robust way. Mule ESB has many components to fulfill the requirements of each integration (for example batch processing, parallel processing, choice, etc.)
  • Mule API gateway is one of the best tools (modules) of Mulesoft's offering. It supports API governance and management very well. One can easily enforce policies on their APIs with API gateway. It enables some of the must-have features in an API solution (i.e. throttling, oAuth, access levels, etc.)
  • Implementing a CI/CD (DevOps) environment for Mule ESB is a very easy task. Mule majorly uses MAVEN as its build tool, which in turn makes it best suitable for CI/CD approach. Mule also provides MAVEN plugins for auto deployments to the servers. Mule also has a best Unit testing module which is MUnit. MUnit can be used for both Unit and Functional testing, and it is easy to write and generates coverage reports in various formats.
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • didn't work well when our developers tried to transform heavy data sets
  • Apache Camel's whole logic is based on java so team needs to have a great skill set in java
  • if there are a handful of workflows then Apache Camel's full potential can't be realized
Read full review
Salesforce
  • Make sure to not over-engineer shared components. It can complicate development
  • Create a roadmap for where you are going - if not, you may miss components
  • I suggest getting support, otherwise it could be a difficult learning curve
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Apache
If you are looking for a Java-based open source low cost equivalent to webMethods or Azure Logic Apps, Apache Camel is an excellent choice as it is mature and widely deployed, and included in many vendored Java application servers too such as Redhat JBoss EAP. Apache Camel is lacking on the GUI tooling side compared to commercial products such as webMethods or Azure Logic Apps.
Read full review
Salesforce
It doesn't have API . We have to go for another API manager. But in Mule, it has both API manager and ESB
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • Very fast time to market in that so many components are available to use immediately.
  • Error handling mechanisms and patterns of practice are robust and easy to use which in turn has made our application more robust from the start, so fewer bugs.
  • However, testing and debugging routes is more challenging than working is standard Java so that takes more time (less time than writing the components from scratch).
  • Most people don't know Camel coming in and many junior developers find it overwhelming and are not enthusiastic to learn it. So finding people that want to develop/maintain it is a challenge.
Read full review
Salesforce
  • Overall a great tool for complex integrations
Read full review
ScreenShots