Apache Kafka vs. Google Cloud Pub/Sub vs. IBM MQ

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Kafka
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
Apache 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
Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
Google offers Cloud Pub/Sub, a managed message oriented middleware supporting many-to-many asynchronous messaging between applications.N/A
IBM MQ
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
IBM MQ (formerly WebSphere MQ and MQSeries) is messaging middleware.N/A
Pricing
Apache KafkaGoogle Cloud Pub/SubIBM MQ
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache KafkaGoogle Cloud Pub/SubIBM 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
Apache KafkaGoogle Cloud Pub/SubIBM MQ
Considered Multiple Products
Apache Kafka
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 …
Chose Apache Kafka
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 …
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 …
Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Chose Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Google Cloud Pub/Sub is a managed service compared to Apache Kafka.

Simple Queue Service (SQS) is an Amazon managed service that supports similar functionality as compared to Google Cloud Pub/Sub. However, we selected Google Cloud Pub/Sub as all other services in our platform …
Chose Google Cloud Pub/Sub
Kafka looks like and ordered queue, there no deliver backoff, so if a message has a problem, it doesn't advance to the next one. Google Cloud Pub/Sub looks like more a SET of messages, and kafka like a LIST. In kafka a same message will repeat instantaneously while it is being …
Chose Google Cloud Pub/Sub
We considered several messaging platforms including Kafka and Kinesis but both would have required more developer work and didn't integrate as nicely with our ecosystem. RabbitMQ is another messaging platform I've researched and prototyped on; it also would have required more …
IBM MQ
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 …
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 …
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 …
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 .
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 …
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 …
Chose IBM MQ
IBM MQ is the product for inter-business communication for security, flexibility and scalability.
Best Alternatives
Apache KafkaGoogle Cloud Pub/SubIBM MQ
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

AWS IoT Core
AWS IoT Core
Score 9.9 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 9.0 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.7 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.7 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 9.0 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.7 out of 10
Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka
Score 8.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache KafkaGoogle Cloud Pub/SubIBM MQ
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(19 ratings)
9.8
(7 ratings)
8.8
(47 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(2 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
9.1
(1 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(2 ratings)
10.0
(2 ratings)
7.8
(6 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
9.5
(29 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.4
(4 ratings)
9.8
(3 ratings)
9.1
(27 ratings)
Configurability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache KafkaGoogle Cloud Pub/SubIBM MQ
Likelihood to Recommend
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
Google
If you want to stream high volumes of data, be it for ETL streaming or event sourcing, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is your go-to tool. It's easy to learn, easy to observe its metrics and scales with ease without additional configuration so if you have more producers of consumers, all you need to do is to deploy on k8s your solutions so that you can perform autoscaling on your pods to adjust to the data volume. The DLQ is also very transparent and easy to configure. Your code will have no logic whatsoever regarding orchestrating pubsub, you just plug and play. However, if you are not in the Google Cloud Pub/Sub environment, you might have trouble or be most likely unable to use it since I think it's a product of Google Cloud.
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.
Read full review
Pros
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).
Read full review
Google
  • With a pub/sub architecture the consumer is decoupled in time from the publisher i.e. if the consumer goes down, it can replay any events that occurred during its downtime.
  • It also allows consumer to throttle and batch incoming data providing much needed flexibility while working with multiple types of data sources
  • A simple and easy to use UI on cloud console for setup and debugging
  • It enables event-driven architectures and asynchronous parallel processing, while improving performance, reliability and scalability
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.
Read full review
Cons
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
Google
  • Would be nice if the queue could be extended beyond 7 days.
  • We found it a bit tricky replay unacknowledged messages when needed.
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.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
Kafka is quickly becoming core product of the organization, indeed it is replacing older messaging systems. No better alternatives found yet
Read full review
Google
It serves all of our purposes in the most transparent way I can imagine, after seeing other message queueing providers, I can only attest to its quality.
Read full review
IBM
No answers on this topic
Usability
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
Read full review
Google
It is easy to create Google Cloud Pub/Sub topics from both Web Console and CLI commands.
Google Cloud Pub/Sub supports creation of one or more subscriptions.
By supporting a BigQuery Pub/Sub subscription to automatically write to a BigQuery table it simplifies development by avoiding implementation of a custom micro service for writes to BigQuery.
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.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
I have never faced a single problem in 4 years.
Read full review
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
Read full review
Performance
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
It's very fast, can be even better if you use protobuf.
Read full review
IBM
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
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.
Read full review
Google
They have decent documentation, but you need to pay for support. We weren't able to answer all our questions with the documentation and didn't have time to setup support before we needed it so I can't give it a higher rating but I think it tends to be a bit slow unless you're a GCP enterprise support customer.
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.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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.
Read full review
Google
Having used Amazon Web Services SNS & SQS I can say that even if the latter may offer more features, Google Cloud Pub/Sub is easier to use. On the other hand, usage of SNS & SQS as well as documentation and troubleshooting is easier with the AWS solution. Since we are not using GCP only for Pub/Sub the choice depends on other variables.
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.
Read full review
Scalability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Google
You can just plug in consumers at will and it will respond, there's no need for further configuration or introducing new concepts. You have a queue, if it's slow, you plug in more consumers to process more messages: simple as that.
Read full review
IBM
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
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.
Read full review
Google
  • Increased Efficiency with reliable and Google managed services up all the time wit Disaster Recovery in place as well
  • Definitely Lower costs being a cloud based solution and easier to setup
  • Faster Project delivery and go to market plan for the business use cases basis this technology at the back end
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
Read full review
ScreenShots