Amazon MSK vs SAS Event Stream Processing comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and SAS are both solutions in the Streaming Analytics category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #7 with an average rating of 7.4, while SAS is ranked #26. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 4.5% mindshare in SA, compared to SAS’s 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of SAS users who would recommend it.

Amazon MSK

Read 14 Amazon MSK reviews

2,243 Views
2,198 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

SAS Event Stream Processing

Read 1 SAS Event Stream Processing review

363 Views
363 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Amazon MSK

SAS Event Stream Processing

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Amazon MSK and SAS Event Stream Processing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Databricks, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Apache and others in Streaming Analytics.

To learn more, read our detailed Streaming Analytics Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Streaming Analytics

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 886,664 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Amazon MSK

Ranking in Streaming Analytics

7th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

SAS Event Stream Processing

Ranking in Streaming Analytics

26th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Amazon MSK is 4.5%, down from 7.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SAS Event Stream Processing is 1.0%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Amazon MSK	4.5%
SAS Event Stream Processing	1.0%
Other	94.5%

Streaming Analytics

Featured Reviews

SYED SHAAZ

Co-Founder & CTO at Photios AI

Improved data streaming and integration challenges prompt search for alternatives

The integration capabilities of Amazon MSK are not very flexible. If you have your own self-managed Kafka, that helps significantly because you can set up configurations. We are considering self-managed Kafka since our product is only one year old. The Kafka integrations are fine, but the configurations are an issue. The only issue with Amazon MSK that we are facing is the configurations. There are preset configurations and limited configurations that we can set for our unique use case. The product could improve by allowing us to set different configurations. I would also like to see Amazon MSK improve in the area of connectors. We are considering Confluent Cloud because they have many more connectors. They have KSQL DB and governance features. It is slightly costlier, but Confluent offers more flexibility with their connectors.

Read full review

Roi Jason Buela

Lead Technical Consultant at Thakral One

A solution with useful windowing features and great for operations and marketing

The persistence could be better. Although ESP is designed for in-memory processing, it would be better if the solution is enhanced or improved on the persistence of the data that is kept in the memory. For example, if one server goes down and the information is stored in the memory, it is lost. Therefore, the persistence needs to be improved so that if there are more cases where the server is down, the information and data can still be intact.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"Amazon MSK has contributed positively to our real-time analytics capabilities because Fortis's dashboards have dashboard health that needs to be maintained, user logs that need to be maintained, and usage tracking."

"Amazon MSK's scalability is very good."

"MSK has already launched ZooKeeper and the cluster, and this is included as an out-of-the-box feature, which is very convenient."

"It provides installations, scaling, and other functionalities straight out of the box."

"My advice to others is this solution is straightforward and the integration is flawless."

"Amazon MSK has significantly improved our organization by building seamless integration between systems."

"MSK has a private network that's an out-of-box feature."

"What I appreciate most about Amazon MSK is that it doesn't require extensive concern about the configurations; it starts checking how the brokers are functioning, and automatically, Amazon MSK tries to resolve all the problems."

More Amazon MSK pros

"The solution is beneficial on an enterprise level."

Cons

"Amazon MSK could improve on the features they offer. They are still lagging behind Confluence."

"One of the reasons why we prefer Kafka is because the support is a little bit difficult to manage with Amazon MSK."

"The cost of using Amazon MSK is high, which is a significant disadvantage, as the increase in cloud costs by 50% to 60% does not justify the savings."

"Horizontal scale-out is actually not easy, making it an area where improvements are required."

"The cost of using Amazon MSK is high, which is a significant disadvantage, as the increase in cloud costs by 50% to 60% does not justify the savings."

"In my opinion, there are areas in Amazon MSK that could be improved, particularly in terms of configuration. Initially setting it up and getting it connected was quite challenging. The naming conventions for policies were updated by AWS, and some were undocumented, leading to confusion with outdated materials. It took us weeks of trial and error before discovering new methods through hidden tutorials and official documentation."

"The only issue with Amazon MSK that we are facing is the configurations. There are preset configurations and limited configurations that we can set for our unique use case."

"It does not autoscale. Because if you do keep it manually when you add a note to the cluster and then you register it, then it is scalable, but the fact that you have to go and do it, I think, makes it, again, a bit of some operational overhead when managing the cluster."

More Amazon MSK cons

"The persistence could be better."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Amazon MSK is less than some competitor solutions, such as Confluence."

"When you create a complete enterprise-driven architecture that is deployable on an enterprise scale, I would say that the prices of Amazon MSK and Confluent Platform become comparable."

"The platform has better pricing than one of its competitors."

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

886,664 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

20%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	4

No data available

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon MSK?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Amazon MSK?

We are recently working with Amazon MSK at Fortis, where we have multiple dashboards in our revenue intelligence platform. We are streaming data from different apps into those dashboards. The data ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Amazon MSK?

We are working with Amazon MSK product, Managed Streaming for Apache Kafka. The main benefits I have seen from using Amazon MSK is that as a B2B enterprise client, we have many SLAs to fulfill. Tra...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Azure Stream Analytics vs Amazon MSK

Compared 17% of the time

Confluent vs Amazon MSK

Compared 11% of the time

Apache Flink vs Amazon MSK

Compared 11% of the time

Aiven Platform vs Amazon MSK

Compared 10% of the time

Amazon Kinesis vs Amazon MSK

Compared 9% of the time

More Amazon MSK Competitors

Apache Spark Streaming vs SAS Event Stream Processing

Compared 39% of the time

Apache Kafka vs SAS Event Stream Processing

Compared 31% of the time

Apache Flink vs SAS Event Stream Processing

Compared 31% of the time

More SAS Event Stream Processing Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Amazon MSK

April 2026

Download Amazon MSK product report

Buyer's Guide

Streaming Analytics

March 2026

Download SAS Event Stream Processing product report

Also Known As

Amazon Managed Streaming for Apache Kafka

No data available

Overview

Amazon Managed Streaming for Apache Kafka (Amazon MSK) is a fully managed service that enables you to build and run applications that use Apache Kafka to process streaming data. Amazon MSK provides the control-plane operations, such as those for creating, updating, and deleting clusters.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Artificial intelligence and machine learning are the most transformative technologies of our time, and SAS is more committed than ever to investing in its potential to move humanity forward.

SAS

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers

Honda, HSBC, Lufthansa, Nestle, 89Degrees.

Find out what your peers are saying about Databricks, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Apache and others in Streaming Analytics. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

886,664 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Streaming Analytics vendors.

We monitor all Streaming Analytics reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.