No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS Database Migration Service 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 Database Migration Service
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (2nd)
Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (7th)
 

Featured Reviews

AG
Delivery Head Data Engineering at BAGIC
Streamlines data migration across platforms with cost-effective and scalable solutions
We have the continuous data integration feature, but it does not work very well in our given ecosystem because we have huge data volume, and it reads from archive log rather than the redo sequence. That is where it lacks, so we are not able to do continuous streaming data injection. The ability to handle heterogeneous migrations for our organization is adequate. I do not see a major value add, or see it as a marquee feature. It is a good tool, but we do not have that sort of uses requirement. In my 10 plus years of experience, I do not see that kind of requirement where I have to replicate it in real time. I leverage AWS CloudWatch for addressing migration issues. The major challenges come across CDC. We have created latency filter and everything, but there is no way to control it. Due to the nature of our business, the transactions increase during month end and year end. My transactions are supposed to increase, my workloads on my core system increases, but my DMS is not able to keep up with them, even if I increase it to a higher side. Improvements could be made in AWS Database Migration Service. Because of that, I am moving out of DMS now to a STRIIM solution. DMS works within AWS ecosystem, but they also have to look for third party solutions. Now Snowflake is a bigger player, or Databricks. Something that could be possible as a connector, whether paid or free, but giving as a connector to that ecosystem as well.
PavanManepalli - PeerSpot reviewer
AVP - Sr Middleware Messaging Integration Engineer at Wells Fargo
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

"One valuable feature of AWS Database Migration Service is change data capture (CDC)."
"AWS Database Migration Service is good for smaller workloads and provides compatibility."
"The product is cheaper than all platforms"
"The initial setup is very simple and straightforward."
"Even if it does break down, it will automatically recover itself and resumes from where it stopped."
"Scalable and stable solution for migrating databases to AWS, with valuable features such as parallel full load and continuous data replication."
"We have an in-built tool provided by Amazon; it is a database migration tool that supports a smooth migration, is instantaneous, and lets us launch the service to reduce the number of manpower needed."
"We have the ability to bring data for all tables of a database in one go, as long as the tables follow a particular naming convention."
"I would rate the scalability of the solution at eight out of ten. We have 20 people who use Confluent in our organization now, and we hope to increase usage in the future."
"The benefit is escaping email communication. Sometimes people ignore emails or put them into spam, but with Confluence, everyone sees the same text at the same time."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"A person with a good IT background and HTML will not have any trouble with Confluent."
"The most valuable feature that we are using is the data replication between the data centers allowing us to configure a disaster recovery or software. However, is it's not mandatory to use and because most of the features that we use are from Apache Kafka, such as end-to-end encryption. Internally, we can develop our own kind of product or service from Apache Kafka."
"We ensure seamless management of Kafka through Confluent, allowing all of our Kafka activities to be handled by a third party."
"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."
 

Cons

"There is no connectivity to the source database or the target database."
"Migrating from here and pushing the data from on-premise to AWS cloud is a big challenge and a few more services from AWS would be helpful. For example, we are currently using ILDB internet tools which move data from on-premise to the AWS cloud. A few more services would be really helpful for me to move the master data."
"The most significant issue is the licensing costs, which sometimes make it difficult for AWS to compete with existing Microsoft pricing structures."
"In my experience, AWS Database Migration Service performs well for its primary purpose of data migration. One area that could be improved is its support for non-AWS file formats, particularly when integrating data from sources stored outside of AWS. For example, handling AWS Data Lakes, Delta Lake, or Hadoop file formats stored in S3 requires extensive configuration and isn't always straightforward. It would be beneficial to streamline this process to ensure smoother migrations from non-AWS environments to AWS. As for additional functionality, I think enhancing support for these external file formats and simplifying configuration steps would be valuable improvements for the service."
"The performance of data migration could be smoother."
"There are a set of complexities and challenges when a user wants to integrate AWS products with Microsoft products."
"The technical support for AWS Database Migration Service is bad. They are still figuring out how to support their product."
"More endpoints need to be supported by AWS Database Migration Service. There's also a need for more control and transparency on the product, including better technical support."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."
"The product should integrate tools for incorporating diagrams like Lucidchart. It also needs to improve its formatting features. We also faced issues while granting permissions."
"It could have more themes. The themes in the version I'm using are very limited; they offer two to three themes."
"From the control center perspective, there is a lot of room for improvement in the visualization."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In terms of pricing, I'd rate it an eight out of ten, considering it's a well-priced solution."
"Pricing for the solution is reasonable, but could still be reduced."
"Cost is the only factor that is challenging."
"AWS Database Migration Service is very inexpensive."
"I rate the product price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is a high price, and ten is a low price."
"The pricing is on the higher side."
"Pricing can be improved."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"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."
"Regarding pricing, I think Confluent is a premium product, but it's hard for me to say definitively if it's overly expensive. We're still trying to understand if the features and reduced maintenance complexity justify the cost, especially as we scale our platform use."
"It comes with a high cost."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"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."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
12%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise17
 

Questions from the Community

What resources can you use to learn how to utilize AWS Database Migration Service?
As with all AWS products, you are given very useful documentation with AWS Database Migration Service. Before we started using this product, we went over it and we were able to learn the basics an...
Would you recommend AWS Database Migration Service as a cloud data integration tool?
My current company started using AWS Database Migration Service upon my recommendation, and I continue telling people how good of a product it is. However, users should keep in mind a few things. ...
Is AWS Database Migration Service an affordable solution?
Compared to similar solutions, AWS Database Migration Service falls somewhere in the middle price-wise, at least from my experience. This being said, it is not a very affordable solution, especial...
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?
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 ...
What is your primary use case for Confluent?
The main use cases for Confluent are log aggregation and streaming. I'm familiar with Confluent stream processing with KSQL. KSQL helps in terms of data analytics strategies because if we are the d...
 

Also Known As

AWS Data Migration Service
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Veoci, Trimble, Nasdaq, shaadi.com, Hotelbeds, SysAid, Verizon, Expedia, Pega
ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Informatica, Palantir and others in Cloud Data Integration. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.