Confluent vs MuleSoft Composer comparison

Confluent and Salesforce are both solutions in the Cloud Data Integration category. Additionally, 95% of Confluent users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Salesforce users who would recommend it.

Confluent

Read 25 Confluent reviews

4,579 Views
2,335 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

MuleSoft Composer

Read 7 MuleSoft Composer reviews

1,461 Views
511 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Confluent

MuleSoft Composer

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Confluent and MuleSoft Composer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Confluent vs. MuleSoft Composer Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Confluent vs. MuleSoft Composer

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,114 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in other categories

Streaming Analytics (5th)

MuleSoft Composer

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Data Integration (25th), Cloud Data Integration (15th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (14th)

Featured Reviews

PavanManepalli

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.

Read full review

reviewer2763903

BTP Architect at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees

Has supported on-premise deployments well but could improve tool consolidation and flow development flexibility

I have analyzed but haven't used MuleSoft Composer extensively. I am not very proficient in the subject of pricing. Both platforms are performing well. If a customer is more SAP-centric, it makes sense to consider integration suite because of the predefined content. A customer will need to have SAP BTP for side-by-side application extensions. MuleSoft Composer is powerful and flexible in terms of installation options, with runtime either on cloud or fully on-premise. It is quite a popular platform. MuleSoft Composer might be less expensive than SAP integration suite, though this is an assumption as I haven't compared prices. I am accustomed to learning and studying with SAP documentation. The organization is more convenient for me, though there are plenty of documentation and resources for MuleSoft Composer as well. The context is the primary consideration. If a customer uses multiple SAP solutions, not just SAP for accounting, it makes sense to consider the integration suite due to better SAP compatibility. When SAP introduces new interface technology, integration suite will be the first to support it, while MuleSoft Composer will need time to develop new connectors. I rate this solution a six out of ten.

Read full review

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 feature that we are using is the data replication between the data centers allowing us to configure a disaster recovery or software. However, is it's not mandatory to use and because most of the features that we use are from Apache Kafka, such as end-to-end encryption. Internally, we can develop our own kind of product or service from Apache Kafka."

"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."

"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."

"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."

"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."

"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."

"We ensure seamless management of Kafka through Confluent, allowing all of our Kafka activities to be handled by a third party."

"Confluent facilitates the messaging tasks with Kafka, streamlining our processes effectively."

More Confluent pros

"The advantage of using MuleSoft as part as the Salesforce ecosystem is that anything new they build is guaranteed to work with the new features that are coming from the other side."

"The functionality of MuleSoft to connect with any database is the most important feature."

"The product is easy to use. You don't need programming skills to use it."

"The way Composer organizes and manages integration processes is most beneficial. We can easily monitor what's running and what isn't and troubleshoot any data integration issues."

"The prebuilt connectors have saved our customers a lot of time and money."

"The solution invokes some RPS from Composer and then sends emails and flat notifications. It helps us integrate with any third-party SAPE or integration tools."

"MuleSoft Composer is powerful and flexible in terms of installation options, with runtime either on cloud or fully on-premise."

Cons

"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."

"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."

"there is room for improvement in the visualization."

"It would help if the knowledge based documents in the support portal could be available for public use as well."

"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 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."

"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."

More Confluent cons

"There is also one limitation. We cannot see logs, latencies, or request counts."

"There are some challenges with API sharing in Composer."

"I used Anypoint Studio, which is good though not very flexible."

"One additional feature they could add might be something like regional prices. Since we're based in Brazil, we pay in dollars but earn in Brazilian Real."

"This solution could be improved by offering more integrations with other platforms."

"The technical support team's response time must be improved."

"MuleSoft Composer needs to improve its interface and scalability."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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 is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."

"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."

"You have to pay additional for one or two features."

"Confluent is highly priced."

"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."

More Confluent pricing and cost advice

"Salesforce is licensed by user and by products and so pricing depending on what your requirements are."

"MuleSoft Composer is affordable, and I rate its pricing a five to six out of ten."

"The tool is a bit expensive."

"It's costly, especially for Indian clients."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

11%

Retailer

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

10%

Manufacturing Company

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	16

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	2

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Confluent?

They charge a lot for scaling, which makes it expensive.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Confluent?

See all answers

What do you like most about MuleSoft Composer?

The way Composer organizes and manages integration processes is most beneficial. We can easily monitor what's running and what isn't and troubleshoot any data integration issues.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MuleSoft Composer?

See all answers

What needs improvement with MuleSoft Composer?

I used Anypoint Studio, which is good though not very flexible. It seems strange that some functionality from MuleSoft Composer is available from Eclipse and some from Visual Code. It would be bett...

See all answers

Comparisons

Palantir Foundry vs Confluent

Compared 14% of the time

Apache Flink vs Confluent

Compared 9% of the time

Amazon Kinesis vs Confluent

Compared 9% of the time

Databricks vs Confluent

Compared 6% of the time

Amazon MSK vs Confluent

Compared 5% of the time

More Confluent Competitors

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs MuleSoft Composer

Compared 13% of the time

Workato vs MuleSoft Composer

Compared 11% of the time

Celigo Integration Platform vs MuleSoft Composer

Compared 8% of the time

PortX vs MuleSoft Composer

Compared 7% of the time

Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC) vs MuleSoft Composer

Compared 6% of the time

More MuleSoft Composer Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Confluent

January 2026

Download Confluent product report

Buyer's Guide

Cloud Data Integration

January 2026

Download MuleSoft Composer product report

Also Known As

No data available

MuleSoft Composer for Salesforce

Overview

Confluent is an enterprise-ready, full-scale streaming platform that enhances Apache Kafka.

Confluent has integrated cutting-edge features that are designed to enhance these tasks:

Speed up application development and connectivity
Enable transformations through stream processing
Streamline business operations at scale
Adhere to strict architectural standards

Confluent is a more complete distribution of Kafka in that it enhances the integration possibilities of Kafka by introducing tools for managing and optimizing Kafka clusters while providing methods for making sure the streams are secure. Confluent supports publish-and-subscribe as well as the storing and processing of data within the streams. Kafka is easier to operate and build thanks to Confluent.

Confluent's software is available in three different varieties:

A free, open-source streaming platform that makes it simple to start using real-time data streams
An enterprise-grade version of the product with more administrative, ops, and monitoring tools
A premium cloud-based version.

Confluent Advantage Features

Confluent has many valuable key features. Some of the most useful ones include:

Multi-language
- Clients: C++, Python, Go, and .NET
- REST proxy: Can connect to Kafka from any connected network device
- Admin REST APIs: RESTful interface for performing administrator operations

Pre-built ecosystem
- Connectors: More than 100 supported connectors, including S3, Elastic, HDFS, JDBC
- MQTT proxy: Gain access to Kafka from MQTT gateways and devices
- Schema registry: Centralized database to guarantee data compatibility

Streaming database
- ksqlDB: Materialized views and real-time stream processing

GUI management
- Control panel: GUI for scalable Kafka management and monitoring
- Health+: Smart alerts and cloud-based control centers

DevOps automation that is flexible
- Confluent for Kubernetes: Complete API to deploy on Kubernetes
- Automated Ansible deployment on non-containerized environments

Dynamic performance
- Self-balancing clusters: Automated partition re-balancing across brokers in the cluster
- Tiered storage: Older Kafka data offloading to object storage with transparent access

Security that is enterprise-grade
- Role-based access control: Granular user/group access authorization
- Audit logs that are structured: Logs of user actions kept in dedicated Kafka topics
- Secret protection: Sensitive information is encrypted

Global resilience
- Linking clusters: A real-time, highly reliable, and consistent bridge across on-premises and cloud environments
- Multiple-region clusters: Single Kafka cluster with automated client failover distributed across multiple data centers
- Replicator: Asynchronous replication that is based on the Kafka Connect framework

Support
- Round the clock enterprise support from Kafka experts

Reviews from Real Users

Confluent stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Two major ones are its robust enterprise support and its open source option. PeerSpot users take note of the advantages of these features in their reviews:

Ravi B., a solutions architect at a tech services company, writes of the solution, “KSQL is a valuable feature, as is the Kafka Connect framework for connecting to the various source systems where you need not write the code. We get great support from Confluent because we're using the enterprise version and whenever there's a problem, they support us with fine-tuning and finding the root cause.”

Amit S., an IT consultant, notes, “The biggest benefit is that it is open source. You have the flexibility of opting or not opting for enterprise support, even though the tool itself is open source.” He adds, “The second benefit is it's very modern and built on Java and Scala. You can extend the features very well, and it doesn't take a lot of effort to do so.”

Confluent

Connect apps and data to Salesforce quickly and easily with clicks, not code — all inside of the Salesforce UI.

Enrich your 360-degree customer view by empowering your Salesforce admins with a no-code solution for quickly unlocking data, connecting apps, and automating integrations to boost productivity.

- Build integrations easily with clicks, not code — all inside Salesforce
- Hit the ground running with a growing library of prebuilt connectors
- Preview as you build connections and design with real data
- Monitor any errors with automatic alerts

Salesforce

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Confluent vs. MuleSoft Composer

December 2025

Free Report: Confluent vs. MuleSoft Composer

Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. MuleSoft Composer and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Confluent vs. MuleSoft Composer report.

See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors.

We monitor all Cloud Data Integration reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.