Basic benchmarks of 5 different MQTT brokers

In the context of my Master’s thesis I conducted a very basic performance comparison of several different MQTT brokers and quickly wanted to share my insights. Please note that these benchmarks are quite superficial only. I did not aim to perform an in-depth evaluation, but rather get a basic idea of their performance in general.


  • To perform load tests in a publish scenario, I used takanorig/mqtt-bench, an MQTT benchmarking tool written in Go.
  • All tests were run with the options -count 10000, -clients 25 and -size 4096, which means to simulate 25 concurrent MQTT clients, each sending 10,000 messages of 4 KBytes size each.
  • Both load testing tool as well as the respective broker were run locally on a 6-core, 12-thread, 3.6 Ghz machine with Ubuntu 18.04.
  • Unless otherwise stated, the brokers were started with default configuration.


The following brokers were tested.

Broker Written In Version Runtime Additional Info
hbmqtt Python 0.8 CPython 3.6
hbmqtt (PyPy) Python 0.8 PyPy 3.6 v7.1.1
HiveMQ CE Java 2019.1 Oracle JDK 12
Mosca JavaScript 2.8.1 Node 4.8.0
Mosquitto C 1.6.3
RabbitMQ Erlang 3.7.4 enabled_plugins=[rabbitmq_management, rabbitmq_management_agent, rabbitmq_management_visualiser, rabbitmq_shovel_management, rabbitmq_stomp, rabbitmq_mqtt,rabbitmq_web_stomp, rabbitmq_web_mqtt]


These are the results that I obtained. Higher is better.

MQTT benchmark results