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

Confluent vs Instaclustr comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 (7th)
Instaclustr
Average Rating
6.0
Reviews Sentiment
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Master Data Management (MDM) (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Confluent and Instaclustr aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Confluent is designed for Streaming Analytics and holds a mindshare of 6.1%, down 7.8% compared to last year.
Instaclustr, on the other hand, focuses on Cloud Master Data Management (MDM), holds 0.4% mindshare, up 0.2% since last year.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Confluent6.1%
Databricks7.4%
Apache Flink6.7%
Other79.8%
Streaming Analytics
Cloud Master Data Management (MDM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Instaclustr0.4%
Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC)18.1%
Semarchy xDM11.5%
Other70.0%
Cloud Master Data Management (MDM)
 

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.
reviewer2808210 - PeerSpot reviewer
Product Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Automated cassandra backups and restores have saved time but documentation and tooling still improve
Instaclustr was genuinely useful for my organization and made my job easy. The features Instaclustr offers were straightforward to use in my experience. The documentation was well-written, though there were some points missing from it. As an end user, I found it somewhat difficult to understand certain parts of the documentation. I saved considerable time and was able to automate the entire process using the ISOP utility provided by Instaclustr. I actually reduced errors as well. Instaclustr provided excellent support for my organization whenever needed. The software tool made my task of performing backup and restore in my environment simple. Time and resources were saved throughout the entire process using Instaclustr. The support from Instaclustr team helped me reduce time significantly. Instaclustr will save time and resources, as it has many utilities developed that automate many work processes in an organization.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"Some of the best features are that it's very quick to set up, very easy to have a centralized area that gives us a history of changes, and the ability to give feedback on any information placed onto the pages."
"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"We ensure seamless management of Kafka through Confluent, allowing all of our Kafka activities to be handled by a third party."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"The biggest benefit of Confluent as a tool is that it is a distributed platform that provides more durability and stability."
"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."
"Instaclustr was genuinely useful for my organization and made my job easy."
 

Cons

"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"The solution could have an extra plugin or upgrading feature. In addition, it could have more integration with different platforms and be more compatible."
"It could have more themes. The themes in the version I'm using are very limited; they offer two to three themes."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"The pricing was high for our needs. We should not have to pay for features we do not use."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"During the development or implementation of Instaclustr, I found a bug or error in the ISOP utility."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It comes with a high cost."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
921,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Retailer
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Construction Company
6%
No data available
 

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 needs improvement with Instaclustr?
During the development or implementation of Instaclustr, I found a bug or error in the ISOP utility. Sanity checks and sanity testing should be performed regularly during the development of the uti...
What is your primary use case for Instaclustr?
Instaclustr was primarily used for backup and restore of Cassandra data. I backed up Cassandra data using Instaclustr in two types: snapshot and commit log backup. The backups were performed from l...
What advice do you have for others considering Instaclustr?
On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Instaclustr overall a six.
 

Comparisons

 

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, Microsoft, Apache and others in Streaming Analytics. Updated: October 2026.
921,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.