What users are saying about

Apache Camel

24 Ratings

Mule ESB

20 Ratings

Apache Camel

24 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 7.4 out of 101

Mule ESB

20 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8.7 out of 101

Add comparison

Likelihood to Recommend

Apache Camel

Apache Camel is well suited for integration of existing software programs/components with newer and external systems. It supports SOAP and REST protocols pretty well. It was not designed to directly support front end systems. It has limited to non-existent support for Javascript. It is not suitable for creating simple standalone applications and meaningful deployment does require use of other frameworks like Spring/Karaf/JBoss.
Surjit Sen profile photo

Mule ESB

Well Suited for:
  • REST APIs.
  • Rapid API Development.
  • Most suitable for integration with SFDC.
  • Batch processing.
  • Parallel processing.
Less appropriate for:
  • Integration with Database.
  • Exposing SOAP services.
  • Small organizations, because it is super costly.
Deepak Kushwaha profile photo

Pros

  • The Java DSP is one of the primary reasons we chose Camel over Spring Integration's XML-based route definitions. It provides compile-time checking of syntax with auto-complete in an IDE (Eclipse, etc).
  • The component documentation on the website is phenomenal.
  • Error handling mechanisms are robust and easy to use and set up. Default settings are great and intuitive.
  • The ability to define distinct contexts within the same application and define context-wide, context-specific error handling is great as well.
No photo available
  • 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.
Deepak Kushwaha profile photo

Cons

  • Some of the documentation is a little sparse. In particular, its TCP-based routes use an underlying Netty server, and the interactions between Netty's decoder capabilities and Apache Camel's routing/handler capabilities can be a little muddy at times. In general it is clear which routes and endpoints are the more frequently used and which haven't been given as much attention.
David McCann profile photo
  • Experienced resources will be required to build complex integrations.
  • It's not perfect to be used as ETL. There are other ETLs in the market which offer better features overall but when it comes to ESB features, Mule is much better.
Ankit Goyal profile photo

Alternatives Considered

WebSphere Message Broker - Expensive, old, hard to use, bad connectorsMulesoft - Very similar to Camel, but expensive and buggy
No photo available
It is a great product, just very expensive and did not have the connectors. For larger companies it works well and is very reliable, but it requires special skills and support staff to manage the performance and scaling attributes. Both tools can do the job, it just depends on the funding and the talent pool available
No photo available

Return on Investment

  • There was certainly a positive impact in terms of code maintainability and ease of implementing new messaging pipelines, however, it's a little difficult to quantify.
David McCann profile photo
  • Overall a great tool for complex integrations
Ankit Goyal profile photo

Pricing Details

Apache Camel

General
Free Trial
Free/Freemium Version
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Entry-level set up fee?
No
Additional Pricing Details

Mule ESB

General
Free Trial
Free/Freemium Version
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Entry-level set up fee?
No
Additional Pricing Details