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

Confluent vs Coralogix comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

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

Confluent
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Coralogix
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
14th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (20th), Log Management (21st), Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) (23rd), API Management (15th), Anomaly Detection Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Confluent is 8.5%, down from 9.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Coralogix is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Confluent8.5%
Coralogix0.4%
Other91.1%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

PavanManepalli - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Jorge Florez - PeerSpot reviewer
SaaS platform used by developers to store and conveniently search for logs
If a company has the budget and the log service is critical for them, I would say use Coralogix. It is a very good service for that. I would rate Coralogix an eight out of ten. It is an excellent service for storing logs for a long time. The capacity is unlimited for unindexed logs. The cost model is also very efficient because you pay for the ingested data per month. This can be compared to a solution like New Relic where you have to pay it upfront and cannot limit the data ingestion. Coralogix provides an easy way to search for logs and to visualize them. This a great feature because developers are constantly looking for or browsing logs.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"With Confluent Cloud we no longer need to handle the infrastructure and the plumbing, which is a concern for Confluent. The other advantage is that all portfolios have access to the data that is being shared."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
"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 benefit is escaping email communication. Sometimes people ignore emails or put them into spam, but with Confluence, everyone sees the same text at the same time."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"The most valuable feature that we are using is the data replication between the data centers allowing us to configure a disaster recovery or software. However, is it's not mandatory to use and because most of the features that we use are from Apache Kafka, such as end-to-end encryption. Internally, we can develop our own kind of product or service from Apache Kafka."
"Numerous data monitoring tools are available, but Coralogix somehow fine-tunes our policies and effectively supports our teams."
"The solution offers very good convenience filtering."
"The best feature of this solution allows us to correlate logs, metrics and traces."
"The solution is easy to use and to start with."
"Coralogix scales well, and I will rate it nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of Coralogix is that it is a very good vendor for metrics."
"A non-tech person can easily get used to it."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
 

Cons

"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."
"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"there is room for improvement in the visualization."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"From my experience, Coralogix has horrible Terraform providers."
"We want it to work at what it is expected to work at and not really based on the updated configuration which one developer has decided to change."
"Coralogix should have some AI capabilities to auto-detect anomalies and provide suggestions."
"The features we were missing in the past were related to the way we see our metrics and aggregate our data."
"Coralogix should have some AI capabilities to auto-detect anomalies and provide suggestions. The increasing volume of data and the resulting bandwidth charges are concerns."
"The customizable dashboards haven't really helped with my company's efficiency at all, and I think there's room for improvement."
"It would be helpful if Coralogix could integrate the main modules that any organization requires into a single subscription."
"Maybe they could make it more user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"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."
"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."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"Currently, we are at a very minimal cost, which is around $400 per month since we have reduced our usage. Initially, we were at $900 per month."
"The platform has a reasonable cost. I rate the pricing a three out of ten."
"The cost of the solution is per volume of data ingested."
"We are paying roughly $5,000 a month."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
869,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

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?
People do not appreciate that Confluent is pushing us more towards Teams because they want to use a true Microsoft Word-type format where we can format our sentences better, instead of just saying ...
What do you like most about Coralogix?
Numerous data monitoring tools are available, but Coralogix somehow fine-tunes our policies and effectively supports our teams.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Coralogix?
The pricing is expensive. We need to reduce logs to manage costs. Despite the expense, I believe it is worth the money to have Coralogix as a tool.
What needs improvement with Coralogix?
Change might not be the correct word, but with every service, there is always room to improve. They are improving their services daily and deploy new features. When we had missing features that we ...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Payoneer, AGS, Monday.com, Capgemini
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. Coralogix and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.