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

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 (6th)
Dataloader.io
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (49th)
 

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 6.6%, down 8.2% compared to last year.
Dataloader.io, on the other hand, focuses on Data Integration, holds 0.7% mindshare, up 0.2% since last year.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Confluent6.6%
Apache Flink8.9%
Databricks8.1%
Other76.4%
Streaming Analytics
Data Integration Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Dataloader.io0.7%
SSIS3.7%
Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC)3.6%
Other92.0%
Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

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.
reviewer2542599 - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Database Administrator at a insurance company with 201-500 employees
Integrating external keys seamlessly while has transaction constraints
I find DataLoader's ability to easily integrate with external keys valuable, which is a bit more challenging with DBM. It provides automation for scheduling data loads, and we use the server's functionality for this. Additionally, DataLoader is cost-effective since it is free. As long as I have stable network access, uploading and downloading data is straightforward.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"Having used SharePoint in the past, when I compare with traditional, old document repositories, like SharePoint, I would definitely recommend Confluent."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"Overall, it's a great company and they have excellent software."
"We ensure seamless management of Kafka through Confluent, allowing all of our Kafka activities to be handled by a third party."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"he product’s most valuable feature is ease of access."
"I find DataLoader's ability to easily integrate with external keys valuable, which is a bit more challenging with DBM."
"DataLoader is cost-effective since it is free."
 

Cons

"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"The beginner who doesn't know how to work on HTML will struggle as when you create spaces in the Confluent, if you want to have some meeting notes or anything else, you need to know HTML and which HTML tags to include."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"DataLoader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions."
"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. Additionally, at times it can be slow, and when integrating DBM, we find it more complex than Dataloader."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"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."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"It comes with a high cost."
"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 product is inexpensive and economical."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Construction Company
20%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Insurance Company
7%
Transportation Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise17
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
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.
What advice do you have for others considering Dataloader.io?
For small to mid-range businesses, DataLoader is perfectly fine, offering everything needed for uploading. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate DataLoader a seven or eight depending on specific n...
 

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: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.