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

CloudQuery 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

CloudQuery
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (23rd)
Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (7th)
 

Featured Reviews

MR
Cloud Security Support at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees
AI-driven queries have transformed how I discover hidden cloud assets and misconfigurations
One of the improvements that could be made to CloudQuery is the GUI. In the past, I had issues where I couldn't see all the information that would pop up at the bottom. That might be fixed by now, but I was experiencing issues with the GUI itself. CloudQuery's AI capabilities lack governance and security features. While the AI is great for helping me craft SQLs to find assets in the environment, it does not have real security features for blocking or similar tasks. I can set up SQLs for alerting, but I find that a bit limiting. For what it is, CloudQuery is great. The only improvement I could suggest would be to set up more alerting features, but overall it is great for what it is, and I would say it feels a little bit limiting.
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

"CloudQuery has positively impacted my organization because instead of navigating through multiple cloud consoles, I can run an SQL query and get, for example, all my S3 buckets that are public, private, or that I need to do something with."
"The AI-generated SQL works well for my team as it gets things right most of the time."
"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 feature of Confluent is the wide range of features provided. They're leading the market in this category."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"The features I find most useful in Confluent are the Multi-Region Cluster, MRC, and the Cluster Linking for replication."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"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 client APIs are the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"CloudQuery really acts as an asset inventory tool, which is great, but I find that somewhat limiting."
"The solution could have an extra plugin or upgrading feature. In addition, it could have more integration with different platforms and be more compatible."
"It would be great if the knowledge based documents in the support portal could be available for public use as well."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security 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 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."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"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 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."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"Confluent is highly priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
12%
Computer Software Company
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 Enterprise17
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with CloudQuery?
CloudQuery could maybe integrate with some AI agents like ChatGPT or Claude to help us do some things like writing in natural language instead of SQL. Regarding CloudQuery's AI capabilities, I thin...
What is your primary use case for CloudQuery?
My main use case for CloudQuery is as a tool for inventory platforms that lets me extract, transform, and query infrastructure data using SQL. A quick specific example of how I use CloudQuery in my...
What advice do you have for others considering CloudQuery?
My advice to others looking into using CloudQuery is that if you like SQL, you can use this product as if it was MySQL, SQL Server, or any other relational database. I would rate this product a 10 ...
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...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Find out what your peers are saying about CloudQuery vs. Confluent and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.