Cassandra vs InfluxDB comparison

Apache and InfluxData are both solutions in the NoSQL Databases category. Apache is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.6, while InfluxData is ranked #6 with an average rating of 8.2. Apache holds a 8.2% mindshare in ND, compared to InfluxData’s 5.2% mindshare. Additionally, 92% of Apache users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of InfluxData users who would recommend it.

Cassandra

Read 25 Cassandra reviews

4,616 Views
2,862 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

InfluxDB

Read 20 InfluxDB reviews

7,127 Views
1,639 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Cassandra

InfluxDB

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 7, 2025

Cassandra and InfluxDB are competing database management products. InfluxDB seems to have the upper hand due to its specialized feature set for time-series applications.

Features: Cassandra handles large data volumes with high availability and scalability across multiple nodes, supports counter features and NoSQL schema, and offers zero-copy streaming. InfluxDB excels in time-series data storage, offers real-time analytics and down-sampling, and integrates with external tools efficiently.

Room for Improvement: Cassandra could improve its user interface, ease-of-use for beginners, and support for complex queries. It might also benefit from enhanced documentation and better integration for specific workloads. InfluxDB may enhance scalability options, optimize resource usage, and expand native integrations with third-party platforms. Improving user community engagement and support might also benefit InfluxDB users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cassandra benefits from widespread integration support and extensive community resources but requires significant expertise to manage. InfluxDB offers a streamlined deployment process, especially for time-series data, with targeted support enhancing user experience. This focus makes InfluxDB's integration process more straightforward for specific workloads compared to Cassandra.

Pricing and ROI: Cassandra incurs higher setup costs due to extensive infrastructure requirements but justifies them with scalability and robustness. InfluxDB presents a more favorable ROI for time-series data, offering cost-effective scalability and performance benefits tailored to this niche. Organizations focused on time-sensitive data might find InfluxDB more financially appealing for their specific needs.

To learn more, read our detailed Cassandra vs. InfluxDB Report (Updated: August 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Cassandra vs. InfluxDB

August 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 909,099 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

Cassandra

Ranking in NoSQL Databases

5th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Vector Databases (12th)

InfluxDB

Ranking in NoSQL Databases

6th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Non-Relational Databases (1st), Open Source Databases (6th), Network Monitoring Software (14th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (12th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Cassandra is 8.2%, down from 9.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of InfluxDB is 5.2%, down from 7.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

NoSQL Databases Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Cassandra	8.2%
InfluxDB	5.2%
Other	86.6%

NoSQL Databases

Featured Reviews

Monirul Islam Khan

Head, Data Integration & Management at a non-profit with 10,001+ employees

Has maintained secure document storage and efficient data distribution with peer-to-peer architecture

The functions or features in Cassandra that I have found most valuable are that it is a distributed system similar to Mongo. It's good enough for comparison with another SQL database, so it's smooth and organized for distributed database system. The peer-to-peer architecture in Cassandra is helpful for network decentralization, and I have already introduced that feature. Cassandra features in peer-to-peer as well as another monitoring, so basically, it's good enough for our service. The tunable consistency level in Cassandra is good, and we are using that feature already. In terms of built-in caching and lightweight transactions in Cassandra, the transaction level is good, and it's optimized, so there are no more issues in that database. Based on my experience, Cassandra is good for document management system, as well as distributed database system, and the automatic recovery process is there. Additionally, the database monitoring system or auditing system is well-comparable with other database systems, so we are actually happy to be using this Cassandra database.

Read full review

Mugeesh Husain

Team Lead, Software at Energybox

Time series data has been managed efficiently for IoT sensors but reporting still needs improvement

How InfluxDB can be improved is relevant since for Energy Box, we face certain issues. We have customers worldwide, including the United States, United Kingdom, and Europe, but when we expanded to China two years ago, they indicated that they do not support the cloud version there. Our application is built on the cloud, which required us to create a separate application for Azure China, which was painful for us. The second issue involves frequent version changes. For example, we started with version one, transitioned to version two, and I heard they are considering InfluxDB version three, reverting to earlier practices. InfluxDB should improve without completely changing its approach. Now we have to redo our work for InfluxDB version three. Regarding needed improvements, the documentation is sufficient, but pricing presents a challenge. InfluxDB has standard pricing, which is acceptable for large companies. However, for startups in our position, they should provide special discounts so everyone can utilize it. The pricing should adapt as companies grow, which is a reasonable expectation.

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

"We have experienced zero downtime using Cassandra, it is highly stable."

"I am satisfied with the performance; so far it has done fairly well and there haven't been any complaints."

"Its retrieval is similar to an RDBMS, so our team finds it easy to adapt."

"Our primary use case for the solution is testing."

"The solution's database capabilities are very good."

"Cassandra is a stable solution."

"Setup was very straightforward."

"Some of the valued features of this solution are it has good performance and failover."

More Cassandra pros

"In our case, it started with a necessity to fill the gap that we had in monitoring. We had very reactive monitoring without trend analysis and without some advanced features. We were able to implement them by using a time series database. We are able to have all the data from applications, logs, and systems, and we can use a simple query language to correlate all the data and make things happen, especially with monitoring. We could more proactively monitor our systems and our players' trends."

"The platform operates very quickly. It is easy to configure, connect, and query and integrates seamlessly with Grafana."

"Because of reduced downtime, we benefit greatly from receiving alerts in advance."

"Overall, InfluxDB delivered excellent performance, stability, and simplicity for telemetry-driven use cases."

"While I would rate InfluxDB a ten on a scale of one to ten, users should be thoughtful about matching the engine to their specific needs."

"The most valuable features of InfluxDB are the documentation and performance, and the good plugins metrics in the ecosystem."

"InfluxDB's best feature is that it's a cloud offering. Other good features include its time-series DB, fast time-bulk queries, and window operations."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is we can use InfluxDB to integrate with and plug into any other tools."

More InfluxDB pros

Cons

"One of the issues with the solution is that you cannot drop write like you're able to in MongoDB and MySQL, where you can join tables."

"If you have a requirement of aggregation and joints, Cassandra doesn't support a solution that can give the aggregation."

"There were challenges with the query language and the development interface. The query language, in particular, could be improved for better optimization. These challenges were encountered while using the Java SDK."

"Batching bulk data can cause performance issues."

"We have had stability issues including out of memory issues and crashes with earlier versions of the product."

"It can be difficult to analyze what's going on inside of the database relative to other databases. It can also be difficult to troubleshoot sometimes."

"The solution doesn't have joins between tables so you need other tools for that."

"Interface is not user friendly."

More Cassandra cons

"One area for improvement is the querying language. InfluxDB deprecated FluxQL, which was intuitive since developers are already familiar with standard querying."

"Customer support is fair enough but can be improved."

"However, I do wish the documentation and community resources around Flux were more extensive and beginner-friendly."

"The solution's UI can be more user-friendly."

"The interface of InfluxDB is so complex and should be made easier for non-technical people."

"InfluxDB can be improved in several ways. The Flux query language needs to be learned, but if there were something similar to SQL or previous options, it would be much easier for users without imposing a learning curve."

"InfluxDB is generally stable, but we've encountered issues with the configuration file in our ticket stack. For instance, a mistake in one of the metrics out of a hundred KPIs can disrupt data collection for all KPIs. This happens because the agent stops working if there's an issue with any configuration part. To address this, it is essential to ensure that all configurations are part of the agent's EXE file when provided. This makes it easier to package the agent for server installation and ensures all KPIs are available from the server. Additionally, the agent cannot encrypt and decrypt passwords for authentication, which can be problematic when monitoring URLs or requiring authentication tokens. This requires additional scripting and can prolong service restart times."

"However, I cannot ignore the challenges I faced while configuring the database with my message brokers, whether Rabbit or Kafka, because the documentation is not properly provided."

More InfluxDB cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I use the tool's open-source version."

"We pay for a license."

"There are licensing fees that must be paid, but I'm not sure if they are paid monthly or yearly."

"I don't have the specific numbers on pricing, but it was fairly priced."

"We are using the open-source version of Cassandra, the solution is free."

"Cassandra is a free open source solution, but there is a commercial version available called DataStax Enterprise."

"The tool is an open-source product."

"InfluxDB is open-source, but there are additional costs for scaling."

"We are using the open-source version of InfluxDB."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

909,099 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Comms Service Provider

Construction Company

Performing Arts

Financial Services Firm

11%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	14

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	9

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cassandra?

The pricing for Cassandra is a little bit high, so it would be better for our community services if they consider community pricing for any non-profit organization like an NGO or other things. It w...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Cassandra?

Regarding areas of improvement for Cassandra, currently, we are not facing significant issues. Some issues arise from our vendors like Apache slowness and distribution or load balancing from HAProx...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Cassandra?

My use case for Cassandra is for a document and other unstructured data management system as well as structured data for ultra-poor member community edition, community members' PII information, so ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with InfluxDB?

If the dashboarding facility can be improved in terms of the visualization parameters and the amount of support available from the community, as well as having smarter alerts to send those alerts t...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for InfluxDB?

My main use case for InfluxDB is to inject all my performance data and visualize it as a data source into Grafana. My data comes from JMeter from a plugin, which is inserting data to InfluxDB, and ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering InfluxDB?

It is good to start with InfluxDB to stabilize your data, visualize your data, and have the data stored on a time-series basis. I would recommend everyone to get into InfluxDB and start using it. T...

See all answers

Comparisons

ClickHouse vs Cassandra

Compared 7% of the time

MongoDB Enterprise Advanced vs Cassandra

Compared 7% of the time

DataStax Enterprise vs Cassandra

Compared 6% of the time

ScyllaDB vs Cassandra

Compared 5% of the time

Oracle NoSQL vs Cassandra

Compared 4% of the time

More Cassandra Competitors

PostgreSQL vs InfluxDB

Compared 7% of the time

MySQL vs InfluxDB

Compared 6% of the time

MongoDB Enterprise Advanced vs InfluxDB

Compared 6% of the time

SQLite vs InfluxDB

Compared 6% of the time

Timescale vs InfluxDB

Compared 2% of the time

More InfluxDB Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cassandra

August 2026

Download Cassandra product report

Buyer's Guide

InfluxDB

August 2026

Download InfluxDB product report

Overview

Cassandra is a distributed and scalable database management system used for real-time data processing.

It is highly valued for its ability to handle large amounts of data, scalability, high availability, fault tolerance, and flexible data model.

It is commonly used in finance, e-commerce, and social media industries.

Apache

InfluxDB offers efficient time series data handling with fast writes, optimized storage, and seamless Grafana integration, making it ideal for high-volume applications like crypto trading and real-time monitoring. Its SQL-like query language and cloud-based options enhance user experience and system scalability.

InfluxDB stands out with its ability to handle high-volume time series data efficiently, thanks to fast data writes and efficient compression. It is highly scalable, providing clustering features for improved performance management. Integration with Grafana enhances visualization, making it easier to analyze complex data through a user-friendly SQL-like query language. Real-time monitoring, historical data access, and proactive alerts enhance system reliability. Its cloud offering simplifies maintenance and operations, making it attractive for users seeking an efficient time series database.

What are the key features of InfluxDB?

Fast Data Writes: Ensures quick data handling necessary for real-time applications.
Optimized Storage: Reduces space requirements and improves performance.
Efficient Compression: Supports high-volume data like time series, enhancing throughput.
Grafana Integration: Supports seamless visualization and analysis of data.
SQL-like Query Language: Simplifies complex data operations with user-friendly queries.

What benefits or ROI can users expect?

Enhanced Performance: Fast processing and optimized storage for better application responsiveness.
Scalability: Clustering features ensure adaptability to growing data volumes.
Improved Reliability: Proactive alerts and real-time monitoring prevent system downtimes.
Ease of Use: SQL-like language and intuitive visuals improve user accessibility.

InfluxDB is applied extensively in industries handling high-volume data needs. For sensor data storage in production environments, it offers reliable performance. Its role in server management metrics and performance monitoring is crucial for maintaining optimal operations. In crypto market data collection, it supports fast-paced trading environments. Industries use it for real-time tracking, like maritime vessel monitoring, leveraging its rapid data handling and visualization capabilities. Its applications also extend to IoT environments, API performance tracking, HVAC systems, and log aggregation, often integrating with Prometheus, Docker, and AWS to enhance system capabilities.

InfluxData

Sample Customers

1. Apple 2. Netflix 3. Facebook 4. Instagram 5. Twitter 6. eBay 7. Spotify 8. Uber 9. Airbnb 10. Adobe 11. Cisco 12. IBM 13. Microsoft 14. Yahoo 15. Reddit 16. Pinterest 17. Salesforce 18. LinkedIn 19. Hulu 20. Airbnb 21. Walmart 22. Target 23. Sony 24. Intel 25. Cisco 26. HP 27. Oracle 28. SAP 29. GE 30. Siemens 31. Volkswagen 32. Toyota

ebay, AXA, Mozilla, DiDi, LeTV, Siminars, Cognito, ProcessOut, Recommend, CATS, Smarsh, Row 44, Clustree, Bleemeo

Buyer's Guide

Cassandra vs. InfluxDB

August 2026

Free Report: Cassandra vs. InfluxDB

Find out what your peers are saying about Cassandra vs. InfluxDB and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

909,099 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Cassandra vs. InfluxDB report.

See our list of best NoSQL Databases vendors.

We monitor all NoSQL Databases 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.