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

Confluent vs Dataloader.io 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

Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (3rd)
Dataloader.io
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (45th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Confluent and Dataloader.io aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Confluent is designed for Streaming Analytics and holds a mindshare of 8.5%, down 9.7% compared to last year.
Dataloader.io, on the other hand, focuses on Data Integration, holds 0.3% mindshare, up 0.1% since last year.
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Confluent8.5%
Apache Flink14.8%
Databricks12.5%
Other64.2%
Streaming Analytics
Data Integration Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Dataloader.io0.3%
Informatica PowerCenter6.0%
SSIS5.7%
Other88.0%
Data Integration
 

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.
Aditi Bhardwaj - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides an ease of access and an automated mapping feature
We need help with large data migrations. It only works well for a few thousand records or less than a million records. Above that, we need to look for alternative solutions. They could provide automated transformation or mapping features around 10 to 15 independent data objects. We could have a default mark or limit of free usage for standard objects. It will be helpful. Additionally, we can have more integrations with large data volumes as we need a lot of exercises to handle the files in case of complex sites.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"Confluent facilitates the messaging tasks with Kafka, streamlining our processes effectively."
"The biggest benefit of Confluent as a tool is that it is a distributed platform that provides more durability and stability."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"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 solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"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."
"I find DataLoader's ability to easily integrate with external keys valuable, which is a bit more challenging with DBM."
"he product’s most valuable feature is ease of access."
"DataLoader is cost-effective since it is free."
 

Cons

"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
"The product should integrate tools for incorporating diagrams like Lucidchart. It also needs to improve its formatting features. We also faced issues while granting permissions."
"One area we've identified that could be improved is the governance and access control to the Kafka topics. We've found some limitations, like a threshold of 10,000 rules per cluster, that make it challenging to manage access at scale if we have many different data sources."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"Currently, in the early stages, I see a gap on the security side. If you are using the SaaS version, we would like to get a fuller, more secure solution that can be adopted right out of the box. Confluence could do a better job sharing best practices or a reusable pattern that others have used, especially for companies that can not afford to hire professional services from Confluent."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools."
"Dataloader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions. Additionally, at times it can be slow, and when integrating DBM, we find it more complex than Dataloader."
"We need help with large data migrations. It only works well for a few thousand records or less than a million records."
"DataLoader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"It comes with a high cost."
"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 is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"The product is inexpensive and economical."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Retailer
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
No data available
 

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 Dataloader.io?
he product’s most valuable feature is ease of access.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Dataloader.io?
Dataloader.io is cost-effective, particularly since it is free.
What needs improvement with Dataloader.io?
DataLoader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions. Additionally, at times it can be slow, and when integrating DBM, we find it more complex than DataLoader.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
UCSF, Box, CareFusion, Unilever, Hershey's
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. Dataloader.io and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.