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

CloudQuery vs Rivery comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
23rd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Rivery
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
16th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (26th), Migration Tools (2nd), Cloud Migration (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Cloud Data Integration category, the mindshare of CloudQuery is 0.6%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rivery is 1.5%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Data Integration Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Rivery1.5%
CloudQuery0.6%
Other97.9%
Cloud Data Integration
 

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.
AD
CDL at Ycotek
Training has boosted custom ETL scripting and now debugging complex incremental loads needs work
The best feature Rivery offers is the ability to build custom or user-defined functions. You can even develop Python scripts to perform transformations on your data frames. This flexibility allows you to implement custom requirements, making Rivery more versatile than relying solely on in-built functions. Regarding features such as the interface, scheduling, or connectors, I found that as of 2022 when I last used it, the monitoring was good, although the debugging process for custom scripts was somewhat challenging. If we encountered issues with custom-built scripts, debugging was difficult since it used to send standard errors rather than specific ones. From what I recall, monitoring worked well, and we could connect to multiple relational and other sources, which was advantageous. A few of my colleagues and I were able to earn certifications on Rivery, which motivated us, even though we could not pursue or implement Rivery project for clients. The learning experience was very valuable as we had around seven or eight resources participating in those trainings, and they were all excited to learn about this new tool for us at the time.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The AI-generated SQL works well for my team as it gets things right most of the time."
"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 solution's most valuable features are that it is quick to connect and simple to use."
"Rivery has positively impacted my organization by helping me streamline my data ingestion and transformation processes, especially in combination with Snowflake."
"Anyone looking into using Rivery should know it is a great product."
"The main benefit Rivery brought to my organization was the time we were able to save on development, and by using all these automation features provided by Rivery together with integration to Snowflake, we were able to solve problems."
"Rivery has positively impacted my organization by enabling us to create a stable pipeline, and we can expand the variety of the data sources as we go very easily, with no worries, and with a lot of confidence in the fact that it can be done."
"This solution has many data sources; they connect to many, many APIs in the market and new ones are being added all the time."
"The process of using Rivery has worked very smoothly for me, and I found the tool very easy to use, allowing me to gain a lot of insights."
"Rivery has positively impacted my organization by reducing the need for a big team of data engineers and speeding up the work when we need to connect to a new data source; this can happen really fast."
 

Cons

"CloudQuery really acts as an asset inventory tool, which is great, but I find that somewhat limiting."
"As an end user of Rivery, I would like to see it be less commercial for users."
"Rivery can be improved by generally investing a bit more depth into the product, mainly in orchestration and specific features comparable to mature products."
"The key challenges I recall were related to the incremental merging logic, which was not functioning properly."
"My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was unfortunately not so good in my recent data project."
"I think Rivery could be improved by having more analytical features inside."
"I think lineage and an impact analysis or logic dependency are lacking."
"Pricing is a little steep for smaller organizations, I would say. The product's pricing model could be a little bit better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I rate the tool's price as six out of ten if I consider the lowest price to be one and the highest price to be ten."
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
Construction Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
 

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 Rivery?
I do not know about the experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing as it was not part of my job.
What needs improvement with Rivery?
I think Rivery could be improved by having more analytical features inside. I do not know if in the latest updates there are some AI tools to use or something related to that. Sometimes I wish for ...
What is your primary use case for Rivery?
My main use case for Rivery involves collecting data from different sources, and with Rivery, I am able to put them together and load the data directly in Snowflake.
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about CloudQuery vs. Rivery and other solutions. Updated: July 2026.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.