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

Confluent vs Informatica Enterprise Data Lake 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)
Informatica Enterprise Data...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (39th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Confluent and Informatica Enterprise Data Lake 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.
Informatica Enterprise Data Lake, on the other hand, focuses on Data Integration, holds 0.4% mindshare, up 0.2% 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 (%)
Informatica Enterprise Data Lake0.4%
Informatica PowerCenter6.0%
SSIS5.7%
Other87.9%
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.
SB
Have built an enterprise-level cloud data pipeline with reliable governance and integration
People use Informatica Enterprise Data Lake because we can create the whole journey from data migration projects from the legacy system to AWS and to the Lake architecture, covering the entire journey from the source to the landing zone, then to the curated zone, and finally consumed by both downstream and upstream applications. The main benefit of Informatica Enterprise Data Lake is that it allows you to use different types of data types, including blobs and storage; all types of data—structured, unstructured, and semi-structured—can exist in the Data Lake architecture, making it robust for retrieving data based on your filtration needs. Its value is actually governed by the client, who combined with our company and AWS, so we all work together to use the workspace and all these things for Informatica Enterprise Data Lake.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"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."
"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."
"Confluent facilitates the messaging tasks with Kafka, streamlining our processes effectively."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"The process of using the tool's scalability option is well documented."
 

Cons

"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"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."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"It could have more themes. They should also have more reporting-oriented plugins as well. It would be great to have free custom reports that can be dispatched directly from Jira."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"Informatica Enterprise Data Lake's setup process was complex since it doesn't support a lot of real-time systems."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"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."
"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 licenses attached to the solution are highly priced."
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 Informatica Enterprise Data Lake?
The process of using the tool's scalability option is well documented.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Informatica Enterprise Data Lake?
Informatica Enterprise Data Lake's cost is higher, but it provides good value for the price. It comes at a reasonable price, which I would rate at eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with Informatica Enterprise Data Lake?
Improvement depends upon how we can faster showcase our data in our reports, whether in Power BI, Tableau, or other formats. Improving the speed of data showcasing and filtration would be better, a...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Informatica Intelligent Data Lake, Intelligent Data Lake
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Databricks, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Confluent and others in Streaming Analytics. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.