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

Boomi iPaaS 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

Boomi iPaaS
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (3rd), Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies (18th), AI Observability (21st)
Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Boomi iPaaS and Confluent aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Boomi iPaaS is designed for Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) and holds a mindshare of 8.0%, down 9.4% compared to last year.
Confluent, on the other hand, focuses on Streaming Analytics, holds 6.9% mindshare, down 8.6% since last year.
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Boomi iPaaS8.0%
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform6.7%
Microsoft Azure Logic Apps6.0%
Other79.3%
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Confluent6.9%
Apache Flink10.9%
Databricks9.0%
Other73.2%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

SG
Associate at Ltim
Cloud integration has transformed projects and delivers faster, more secure business workflows
In my opinion, the best feature Boomi iPaaS offers is its user interface, which is easy to maintain, has a low cost, and offers low licensing costs, making it very easy to develop any integration. Regarding features, Boomi iPaaS performs best and is more stable. It also has easy support, allowing me to contact the Boomi support vendor team for assistance with atoms, molecules, runtimes, and clusters. Security-wise, it is also more secure, enabling the use of internal OAuth 2.0 tokens and basic authentication for high-level authentication, and I can integrate with third-party services to obtain authentication, with some banking projects in Boomi iPaaS using PayU, Razorpay, and various payment platform authentications. The positive impact of Boomi iPaaS on my organization has been significant, as after adopting it, I received many projects with the help of the Boomi vendor who brought me opportunities for Boomi iPaaS usage. Previously, I used TIBCO, MFT, and WebMethods, which were all very old systems. Boomi iPaaS is cloud-based and continues to update constantly, which has been very useful and led to more business. I can definitely say I see specific positive outcomes after moving to Boomi iPaaS, noting improvements in efficiency, cost savings, and faster project delivery. The connector-based licensing cost is very low compared to other integration tools, and for security purposes, it is helpful. I have observed significant good performance transitioning from old legacy systems to Boomi iPaaS.
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

"The ROI is that application integration is delivered much faster and efficiently than in a conventional approach, resulting in greatly reduced time-to-market for new initiatives and enabling organizations to innovate and differentiate in an ever growing competitive and changing market."
"The integration landscape has become complex, and having a data strategy with unified data models would make integration easier for any platform, including Boomi."
"This solution has a user-friendly interface and very good documentation with solutions that helped us in working with the tool efficiently."
"The product's integration features are quite rich and low code. It is easy to use."
"The solution has a lot of connectors, which is quite helpful."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring part to debug certain issues and find problems."
"Boomi AtomSphere Integration is stable."
"It's very user-friendly and designed to be easy to use for the end user."
"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"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."
"Confluent facilitates the messaging tasks with Kafka, streamlining our processes effectively."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
 

Cons

"There are still some areas that need improvement. For example, when updates are going on, the product becomes very slow."
"The IDE is lacking in the ability to script."
"There are more mature (dedicated) API management and master data management (MDM) solutions available in the market."
"There is no validation in the mapping profile custom scripting, such as IntelliSense or advanced error checking."
"The deployment was simple, but the implementation is missing a lot of capabilities."
"There are still some areas that need improvement. For example, when updates are going on, the product becomes very slow."
"They need to introduce more configurable functions to remove scripting or coding. Scripting should be minimized. It should have exhaustive functions. Currently, it lacks in this aspect."
"There are stability issues."
"The Schema Registry service could be improved. I would like a bigger knowledge base of other use cases and more technical forums. It would be good to have more flexible monitoring features added to the next release as well."
"It would help if the knowledge based documents in the support portal could be available for public use as well."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"It could be more user-friendly and centralized. A way to reduce redundancy would be helpful."
"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."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is a bit complex. While the entry fee may be lower than other solutions, it could be expensive depending on your usage."
"There could be an easy-to-understand licensing model."
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"The cost of the solution is in the neighborhood of $20,000 annually. There are no costs above the standard licensing fee."
"This solution is very economical (based on the connections)."
"Approximately 20k annually."
"The licensing model of Dell Boomi is based on a ‘pay-per-use’ model."
"Boomi AtomSphere Integration is expensive. I rate its pricing an eight out of ten."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"It comes with a high cost."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"Confluent is highly priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
11%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Boomi AtomSphere Integration?
The tool's most valuable features I've found are related to debugging and testing. It makes it easy to track execution, documents, and process history. This functionality is particularly useful for...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Boomi AtomSphere Integration?
The pricing for Boomi iPaaS is reasonable, costing around $6,000 per year. It is affordable even for small customers, like a salon with a couple of branches.
What needs improvement with Boomi AtomSphere Integration?
I think data governance and data catalog are areas that Boomi iPaaS can focus on. Informatica has data catalog and data lineage functionalities, in addition to their ETL capabilities. Boomi iPaaS c...
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?
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 ...
 

Also Known As

Boomi
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DocuSign Inc., Innotas, Certent, Renesas Electronics America (REA), Kelly-Moore Paints, Mindjet, City of McKinney, Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers (RBA), Daylight Transport, A10 Networks
ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Salesforce, Boomi and others in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS). Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.