MQTT vs Other IoT Messaging Protocols: Detailed Comparison

mart homes, wearables, industrial systems, and even connected cities all have one thing in common: they need a communication protocol to keep everything running smoothly. With so many options out there, today we’re comparing the main ones — MQTT vs. other protocols like AMQP, XMPP, DDS, and CoAP — so you can choose the best fit for your IoT project.

WebbyLab, as an experienced IoT software development services provider, will explore the features and use cases of these communication protocols and share firsthand experience using MQTT in such projects as 2Smart Cloud, 2Smart Standalone, Propuskator, and MyBox. So, let’s find out how each protocol works to help you choose the right solution for your needs.

We built three of our own products using MQTT and developed tools to speed up custom solution development with a similar architecture. Our experience and awareness of the challenges we faced in our projects helped shape these tools.

Kostiantyn Oliynyk

Head of IoT at Webbylab

WebbyLab’s 2Smart Cloud platform leverages the MQTT protocol.

Why Are IoT Messaging Protocols Important?

IoT devices generate immense volumes of data that must be collected, processed, and shared. Reliable and swift exchange of this information within the IoT ecosystem is even more critical. But what’s the role of MQTT vs. other protocols, and how do MQTT alternatives for IoT stack up in this process?

The most efficient messaging protocol IoT network offers the following advantages:

• Adapting to different network configurations
• Supporting low-power devices
• Handling connectivity interruptions
• Ensuring data security 
• Enabling real-time data exchange and status updates
• Ensuring interoperability between devices and systems

All in all, the messaging protocols allow for reliable data delivery in dynamic and often unpredictable IoT environments.

MQTT vs AMQP Protocol

Let’s start with our IoT messaging protocols comparison. Look at the definition and difference between MQTT and AMQP:

• MQTT (Message Queuing Telemetry Transport) — a lightweight messaging protocol designed for efficient communication and data exchange in IoT applications. 
• AMQP (Advanced Message Queuing Protocol) — an advanced messaging protocol that enables reliable communication between distributed systems, widely used in enterprise messaging and financial services.

Here’s a quick AMQP vs MQTT feature comparison:

Alexey Krol

Chief Business Development Officer

Consulted 30+ IoT startups to speed up time to market.

Get a Consultation

MQTT vs AMQP: In-Depth Comparison

Let’s compare AMQP vs MQTT two more thoroughly. We’ll elaborate on the points mentioned in the table above to give you a complete picture of these messaging protocols.

Architecture

MQTT follows a lightweight publish-subscribe (or client-broker) architecture. In this scenario, MQTT brokers are intermediaries between the MQTT clients and their intended subscribers.

The workflow of an MQTT broker

AMQP follows client-broker and client-server architectures. It provides an extensible framework for building complex messaging scenarios in IoT systems.

Messaging Scenarios

MQTT excels in publish-subscribe messaging scenarios. It supports a straightforward topic-based messaging model, where publishers send messages to specific topics, and subscribers receive those messages.

The AMQP protocol supports various messaging scenarios, including publish-subscribe, publish-consume, lifetime, and more. It offers greater flexibility and fine-grained control over message routing and delivery.

A publish-consume messaging scenario of the AMQP broker

Transactions

Transactions are predefined sequences of message exchanges between two communicating nodes. MQTT is limited in such scenarios, providing the following semantic options: Publish, Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Connect, Disconnect, and Close. AMQP, in turn, offers way more: Deliver, Publish, Get, Select, Ack, Nack, Recover, Delete, Reject, Open, and Close.

User Security

MQTT offers TSL to authorize client-broker connections, a network-level firewall for broker protection, and encryption for MQTT packet security. AMQP provides a range of authentication options, including usernames/passwords and certificates. It also supports encryption and data integrity through protocols like TLS and SASL.

The MQTT using TSL and a firewall for security

Reliability

MQTT and AMQP offer quality-of-service (QoS) to control message delivery reliability. Yet, while AMQP supports only two levels of QoS, MQTT has three. They are as follows:

• QoS0 sends messages without requiring feedback from the broker
• QoS1 resends messages until a confirmation is received
• QoS2 ensures the broker sends a confirmation for each message sent

Scalability

Both AMQP vs MQTT performance allows for handling large-scale deployments. Yet, owing to MQTT’s lightweight nature and publish-subscribe architecture, it’s easier to scale.

Extensibility

MQTT is less extensible than AMQP but provides simplicity and efficiency for resource-limited environments. AMQP, on the other hand, offers a rich and extensible data model. It supports advanced features like message properties, annotations, and header sections.

MQTT vs XMPP Protocol

Let’s continue our comparison of IoT protocols and standards and go into greater depth about XMPP vs MQTT. Here’s the table outlining these solutions’ core advantages, drawbacks, and use cases:

Both MQTT vs XMPP are valuable for specific use cases. While MQTT may be perfect for IoT environments with limited resources, XMPP works well for instant messaging, offering advanced extensibility.

MQTT vs DDS Protocol

We’ve come to the point of finding the difference between MQTT vs DDS. Look at the core distinctions and similarities between these messaging protocols in the table below:

When comparing the DDS protocol vs MQTT, one big difference is how they handle communication. DDS supports a decentralized, peer-to-peer model, meaning devices can communicate directly with each other without going through a central hub —  a broker. MQTT, on the other hand, uses a broker to manage all the messaging.

Speaking of possible applications, MQTT allows smart devices in the home automation system to communicate seamlessly, as these solutions are lightweight and well-suited for resource-constrained settings. DDS, in turn, can be a good choice for critical healthcare, the military, and security facilities for its robust reliability and prompt real-time performance.

MQTT vs CoAP Protocol

Let’s study MQTT and CoAP as part of our IoT communication protocols comparison. Here are the primary points:

When comparing MQTT vs CoAP, both keep your data secure, but in different ways. MQTT uses SSL/TLS to protect data during transfer, while CoAP has built-in DTLS to safeguard its messages right from the start.

Regarding message reliability, MQTT has the upper hand, given the three levels of QoS. As we mentioned earlier, MQTT’s QoS1 makes sure messages get through, even if it means sending them a few times. CoAP does something similar with a confirmable message delivery mechanism. If a message doesn’t get an acknowledgment instantly, CoAP keeps retrying until it does.

What’s more, MQTT has more built-in features like “last will messages” that handle unexpected disconnections or message retention for new subscribers. In contrast, when you look at CoAP vs MQTT, CoAP keeps things simple with the block-wise transfer, which helps manage large data efficiently over constrained networks.

IoT Messaging Protocols Use Cases

We’ve already mentioned the IoT use cases of messaging protocols just briefly. Let’s now study each real-life application of MQTT, AMQP, DDS, and CoAP in greater detail.

MQTT Use Cases:

• IoT applications in industrial automation, smart agriculture, automotive, environmental monitoring, and smart home systems
• Use cases in energy management solutions
• Amazon, Bosch, and IBM Watson leverage MQTT

We’ve developed a range of devices that use MQTT to connect with the cloud, both for ourselves and our clients. Our projects have included everything from basic relays and LED lamps with advanced features to complex charging stations, load balancing devices, and digital twins. This confirms both the versatility and reliability of MQTT and the possibility of its use in completely different niches.

Kostiantyn Oliynyk

Head of IoT at Webbylab

AMQP Use Cases:

• Use cases in financial services for real-time data streaming, transaction processing, and secure communication between financial institutions
• Applications in enterprise messaging for reliable communication between distributed systems
• JPMorgan and Google leverage AMQP

DDS Use Cases:

• Real-time monitoring in aerospace, defense, automotive, and industrial automation systems
• Industrial IoT applications in predictive maintenance, supply chain management, and manufacturing processes
• Volkswagen, NASA, and Siemens leverage DDS

CoAP Use Cases:

• IoT deployments for resource-constrained networks and devices like smart sensors and actuators
• Use cases in home automation systems
• Cisco and Intel leverage CoAP messaging protocols in IoT

Key Challenges in Using IoT Messaging Protocols

While MQTT vs. other protocols make it easier for devices to communicate, there are some obstacles you’ll likely run into. Here are the main IoT challenges and solutions:

• Scalability. As your IoT ecosystem grows, so does the amount of data and devices. Make sure your chosen protocols match the evolving needs of your system.
• Security. Protocols like MQTT vs CoAP vs XMPP and others offer certain levels of security, but setting them up properly can be tricky. To keep your data safe, leverage built-in security measures and implement additional protection strategies.
• QoS management. Reliable message delivery is a must in IoT systems. However, it may be difficult to choose a suitable QoS level. For example, in critical applications, you’ll want the most reliable content delivery, but that can slow down data exchange. Thus, try to strike the right balance.

WebbyLab Experience in IoT Messaging Protocols

Among all the messaging protocols in IoT, WebbyLab has extensively worked with MQTT. We use it in our three proprietary products — 2Smart Cloud, 2Smart Standalone, and Propuskator — and in a solution we delivered for our client, MyBox.

WebbyLab’s 2Smart Standalone system uses the MQTT protocol for communication

When we first started working with IoT, we knew we’d be developing multiple products using MQTT. To keep everything consistent, we created our own MQTT convention based on Homie version 3.0.1 from 2018. This convention documents the rules for how topics and messages are structured in the MQTT broker, ensuring that all our devices and clients work together seamlessly.

For MyBox, we developed a cloud ecosystem to manage charging stations and devices. It’s essentially an upgraded version of our 2Smart Cloud platform with MQTT as the backbone for communication between the cloud, devices, and users. MyBox covers everything from various charging stations to tools for managing the whole process. And, of course, all MyBox devices work according to our MQTT convention.

MyBox platform based on 2Smart Cloud

Choosing this convention allowed us to develop an SDK that simplifies the creation of integration bridges, firmware, and even UI components in all our projects. We expanded the original convention to address all business tasks, and now we’re confident that 99.9 percent of IoT devices can be implemented using our convention without losing any essential functionality.

Kostiantyn Oliynyk

Head of IoT at Webbylab

Beyond MyBox, we built three more projects based on 2Smart Cloud. Those are a mobile app for remote monitoring and maintenance of heat pumps, an application for managing and configuring smart LED lamps, and a white-label solution for digital twins — each of them uses MQTT for communication.

2Smart Cloud-based mobile app for heat pump monitoring

But why did we choose MQTT as our core protocol in the first place? Here are the reasons:

• Real-time communication enables instant updates from devices and immediate execution of commands sent to the device
• The MQTT broker serves as the central directory of truth, ensuring that all connected devices, clients, and system microservices have access to relevant and up-to-date data and status information
• MQTT allows us to implement limitless usage scenarios, and the response speed is measured in tens of milliseconds
• MQTT provides sufficient security measures for secure communication
• Real-time collection of historical data is possible
• The lightweight nature of the protocol allows for easy implementation on various devices, including those with limited resources or weak cloud connectivity
• MQTT supports the management of multiple devices and clients through the publish-subscribe model
• Devices operate autonomously and do not rely on continuous application operation due to the asynchronous nature of the protocol
• Real-time event notifications can be delivered to users through various channels such as the IoT platform itself, push notifications, email, SMS, or messengers
• MQTT offers flexibility and scalability with a wide range of available solutions, including SaaS offerings and other paid or free options

Besides that, the MQTT’s popularity played a crucial role in our decision to adopt it. With major smart consumer electronics and DIY solutions supporting this protocol, a wide range of firmware is available for popular devices. It allows us to seamlessly integrate it into our products without disrupting the firmware’s business logic.

Since we build MQTT-based solutions and offer products for IoT device developers, we’ve picked up some best practices and internal tools for working with MQTT brokers and clients. One of our go-to solutions is MQTT Explorer. It helps us subscribe to and browse topics, making developing and testing new IoT devices much easier.

In certain cases, we use a combination of protocols for device communication. For example, we leverage HTTPS across all our projects for OTA updates. Our ACS Propuskator also employs HTTPS, as this protocol ensures secure and reliable delivery of critical notifications and the transmission of larger data volumes like firmware updates. Yet, HTTPS lacks real-time capabilities and is not suitable for receiving sensor and telemetry data.

Propuskator access control system

All in all, we believe that MQTT is suitable for IoT applications in various sectors, from smart home systems and environmental monitoring to industrial automation and the automotive industry.

Leverage MQTT with WebbyLab

Selecting a suitable protocol is critical for your IoT project’s further growth. Each with its distinct features, use cases, and standards, MQTT vs. other protocols like AMQP, XMPP, DDS, and CoAP are the options you may want to consider.

If you need guidance on the best-fitting solution for your requirements, WebbyLab can consult you on the most commonly used messaging protocol in IoT — MQTT. Feel free to contact us to get practical insights from our team’s extensive background.