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."It is also good for knowledge base management."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"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 product is easy to use. You don't need programming skills to use it."
"The prebuilt connectors have saved our customers a lot of time and money."
"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."
"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."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"There is a limitation when it comes to seamlessly importing Microsoft documents into Confluent pages, which can be inconvenient for users who frequently work with Microsoft Office tools and need to transition their content to Confluent."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"It would help if the knowledge based documents in the support portal could be available for public use as well."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"there is room for improvement in the visualization."
"MuleSoft Composer needs to improve its interface and scalability."
"This solution could be improved by offering more integrations with other platforms."
"The technical support team's response time must be improved."
Confluent is ranked 4th in Streaming Analytics with 19 reviews while MuleSoft Composer is ranked 13th in Cloud Data Integration with 3 reviews. Confluent is rated 8.4, while MuleSoft Composer is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Confluent writes "Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MuleSoft Composer writes "The prebuilt connectors save a lot of time and money, but the customer support and price must be improved". Confluent is most compared with Amazon MSK, Amazon Kinesis, Databricks, AWS Glue and Oracle GoldenGate, whereas MuleSoft Composer is most compared with Mule Anypoint Platform, Workato, Celigo Integration Platform, Microsoft Azure Logic Apps and Zapier. 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.
