Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AWS Data Pipeline [EOL] vs Confluent comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

AWS Data Pipeline [EOL]
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (3rd)
 

Featured Reviews

Geoffrey Leigh - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable, scalable, and reliable solution for moving and processing data
We're only considering enhancing the presentation layer to give a more multidimensional OLAP view that AWS seems to have decided on. Redshift with the data mart structure is like an OLAP cube. Oracle Analytics Cloud is an over-code killer and is not what we need. I was looking at Mondrian, which used to be part of the open-source stack from another vendor that works. Still, I am also looking at some of the other OLAP environments like Kaiser and perhaps decided to go to Azure with Microsoft Azure analysis cloud, but that's not multidimensional either as SSAS used to be. We tried the Mondrian, and that didn't perform how we expected. So, we are looking at resetting something to perform as an OLAP in the cloud, particularly AWS, so that we might consider an Azure solution.
PavanManepalli - PeerSpot reviewer
Has supported streaming use cases across data centers and simplifies fraud analytics with SQL-based processing
I recommend that Confluent should improve its solution to keep up with competitors in the market, such as Solace and other upcoming tools such as NATS. Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools. They need to improve in that direction by not only reducing costs but also providing better solutions for the problems customers face to avoid frustrations, whether through future enhancement requests or ensuring product stability. The cost should be worked on, and they should provide better solutions for customers. Solutions should focus on hierarchical topics; if a customer has different types of data and sources, they should be able to send them to the same place for analytics. Currently, Confluent requires everything to send to the same topic, which becomes very large and makes running analytics difficult. The hierarchy of topics should be improved. This part is available in MQ and other products such as Solace, but it is missing in Confluent, leading many in capital markets and trading to switch to Solace. In terms of stability, it is not the stability itself that needs improvement but rather the delivery semantics. Other products offer exactly-once delivery out of the box, whereas Confluent states it will offer this but lacks the knobs or levers for tuning configurations effectively. Confluent has hundreds of configurations that application teams must understand, which creates a gap. Users are often unaware of what values to set for better performance or to achieve exactly-once semantics, making it difficult to navigate through them. Delivery semantics also need to be worked on.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of the solution is that orchestration and development capabilities are easier with the tool."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"I find Confluent's Kafka Connectors and Kafka Streams invaluable for my use cases because they simplify real-time data processing and ETL tasks by providing reliable, pre-packaged connectors and tools."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"The features I find most useful in Confluent are the Multi-Region Cluster, MRC, and the Cluster Linking for replication."
"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
 

Cons

"It's almost semi-automatic because you must review and approve code push, which works well. Still, we had many problems getting there during the deployment process, but we got there."
"The user-defined functions have shortcomings in AWS Data Pipeline."
"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."
"Confluent has fallen behind in being the tool of the industry. It's taking second place to things such as Word and SharePoint and other office tools that are more dynamic and flexible than Confluent."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"It could have more themes. They should also have more reporting-oriented plugins as well. It would be great to have free custom reports that can be dispatched directly from Jira."
"Confluent has a good monitoring tool, but it's not customizable."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The way we use it, I think it is fair as we're getting a good value for money compared to having a server or some other data pipeline."
"I rate the pricing between six to eight on a scale from one to ten, where one is low price, and ten is high price."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"Confluence's pricing is quite reasonable, with a cost of around $10 per user that decreases as the number of users increases. Additionally, it's worth noting that for teams of up to 10 users, the solution is completely free."
"It comes with a high cost."
"The pricing model of Confluent could improve because if you have a classic use case where you're going to use all the features there is no plan to reduce the features. You should be able to pick and choose basic services at a reduced price. The pricing was high for our needs. We should not have to pay for features we do not use."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is low pricing and ten is high pricing, I would rate Confluent's pricing at five. I have not encountered any additional costs."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
870,623 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Confluent?
I find Confluent's Kafka Connectors and Kafka Streams invaluable for my use cases because they simplify real-time data processing and ETL tasks by providing reliable, pre-packaged connectors and to...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Confluent?
They charge a lot for scaling, which makes it expensive.
What needs improvement with Confluent?
People do not appreciate that Confluent is pushing us more towards Teams because they want to use a true Microsoft Word-type format where we can format our sentences better, instead of just saying ...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

bp, Cerner, Expedia, Finra, HESS, intuit, Kellog's, Philips, TIME, workday
ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Data Pipeline [EOL] vs. Confluent and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
870,623 professionals have used our research since 2012.