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

CloverETL 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

CloverETL
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (60th), Data Visualization (38th)
Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

CloverETL and Confluent aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. CloverETL is designed for Data Integration and holds a mindshare of 0.5%, up 0.2% compared to last year.
Confluent, on the other hand, focuses on Streaming Analytics, holds 8.4% mindshare, down 9.8% since last year.
Data Integration Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
CloverETL0.5%
Informatica PowerCenter6.3%
SSIS5.9%
Other87.3%
Data Integration
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Confluent8.4%
Apache Flink14.6%
Databricks13.1%
Other63.9%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

it_user856614 - PeerSpot reviewer
Very easy to schedule jobs and monitor them, however we run out heap space even with a high allocation
Flexibility: We can bring in data from multiple sources, e.g., databases, text files, JSON, email, XML, etc. This has been very helpful Connectivity to various data sources: The ability to extract data from different data sources gives greater flexibility. Server features for scheduler: It is…
Gustavo-Barbosa Dos Santos - PeerSpot reviewer
Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming
Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance. It helps us understand the various requirements of multiple customers and validates the information for different versions. We can automate the tasks using Confluent Kafka. Thus, it guarantees us the data quality and maintains the integrity of message contracts.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Key features include wealth of pre-defined components; all components are customizable; descriptive logging, especially for error messages."
"Server features for scheduler: It is very easy to schedule jobs and monitor them. The interface is easy to use."
"No dependence on native language and ease of use.​​"
"Connectivity to various data sources: The ability to extract data from different data sources gives greater flexibility."
"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 monitoring module is impressive."
"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."
"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"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 most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"​Resource management: We typically run out of heap space, and even the allocation of high heap space does not seem to be enough.​"
"Needs: easier automated failure recovery; more, and more intuitive auto-generated/filled-in code for components; easier/more automated sync between CloverETL Designer and CloverETL Server."
"Its documentation could be improved.​"
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"It could be more user-friendly and centralized. A way to reduce redundancy would be helpful."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"There is a limitation when it comes to seamlessly importing Microsoft documents into Confluent pages, which can be inconvenient for users who frequently work with Microsoft Office tools and need to transition their content to Confluent."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Confluent is highly priced."
"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 has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"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."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"It comes with a high cost."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
14%
Retailer
7%
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 Enterprise15
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team. The lack of easy access to the Confluent support team is also a...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IBM, Oracle, MuleSoft, GoodData, Thomson Reuters, salesforce.com, Comcast, Active Network, SHOP.CA
ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Find out what your peers are saying about CloverETL vs. Confluent and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.