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

Confluent vs HiT Software DBMoto 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)
HiT Software DBMoto
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Replication (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Confluent and HiT Software DBMoto 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.
HiT Software DBMoto, on the other hand, focuses on Data Replication, holds 2.2% mindshare, up 0.8% since last year.
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Confluent8.5%
Apache Flink14.8%
Databricks12.5%
Other64.2%
Streaming Analytics
Data Replication Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
HiT Software DBMoto2.2%
NetApp Snapshot12.0%
NetApp SnapMirror10.7%
Other75.1%
Data Replication
 

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.
reviewer1077405 - PeerSpot reviewer
Replication monitor feature is helpful in that it allows a quick view of the status, errors, and results of the last replication
We appreciate the ease of use in this solution. It looks like File Explorer, where you set up your source and targets. Replications are created simply by using the replication wizard. It also has functionality for scheduling, verification, and alerts. The ability to write code for transformations is very useful. Once the replications are set up it is simple to maintain. The Replication monitor is helpful in that it allows a quick view of the status, errors, and results of the last replication. Replication logs and history files are very useful for determining problematic data issues. The transaction latency tool is also helpful for determining how many connections are required for larger files. The replication types that are available are: Refresh Only, Continuous, and Synchronization. We currently use Refresh Only (scheduled refreshes), and Continuous. The source and target table verification is very helpful for running checks. The Replication Monitor is also a great plus, which shows a quick view of the replication status.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"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."
"A person with a good IT background and HTML will not have any trouble with Confluent."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"The biggest benefit of Confluent as a tool is that it is a distributed platform that provides more durability and stability."
"The most valuable features are that is easy to install and it is user-friendly."
"DBMoto was very simple to set up and move our tables to the Oracle DB."
 

Cons

"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."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"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."
"We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"This product would be improved with additional built-in functions for simpler date conversion, as well as for data type transformations."
"Pricing is an area that needs improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"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."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"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."
"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."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"Customers pay a license fee yearly."
"I found the price to be quite reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
869,760 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%
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 ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
DBMoto
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
JAS Forwarding Worldwide, Animal, Financiera Pagos Internacionales C.F., Bur de Credito, Qualitas-IT, EFCO Corporation, Andrews Consulting, ASL Modena, BancAssurance Popolari S.p.A., Banco BICSA, Cheshire County Council, Epson Precision, Ferrari North America
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. HiT Software DBMoto and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.