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

Confluent vs SAP Process Orchestration 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
6.7
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (4th)
SAP Process Orchestration
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Confluent and SAP Process Orchestration aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Confluent is designed for Streaming Analytics and holds a mindshare of 8.2%, down 10.9% compared to last year.
SAP Process Orchestration, on the other hand, focuses on Business-to-Business Middleware, holds 7.7% mindshare, down 12.0% since last year.
Streaming Analytics
Business-to-Business Middleware
 

Featured Reviews

Gustavo-Barbosa Dos Santos - PeerSpot reviewer
Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming
Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance. It helps us understand the various requirements of multiple customers and validates the information for different versions. We can automate the tasks using Confluent Kafka. Thus, it guarantees us the data quality and maintains the integrity of message contracts.
Laxman  Molugu - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhances operational efficiency with valuable prepackaged content and cost-effective pricing
For organizations that operate within an SAP ecosystem, SAP Process Orchestration is recommended due to its cost-effectiveness and the availability of valuable prepackaged content. It is important to consider the needs of your industry, as SAP Process Orchestration may not meet all requirements in consumer-oriented sectors. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The monitoring module is impressive."
"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"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."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Process Orchestration fulfils the need for middleware to mediate types of connectivity."
"The performance of data processing has increased."
"The main benefit is that the solution is low maintenance. Moreover, it's the license cost is very low because it's part of the package. The maintenance is standard maintenance. And the updates are regular. So there's a regular update and you can choose whether you want to do those updates or not."
"The solution offers very good documentation and manuals to assist with understanding the solution."
"SAP Process Orchestration provides extensive integrations with external partners, supports B2B operations, and has prepackaged content that saves development time."
"With the latest version what I find to be the most valuable are the REST, SuccessFactors, and Ariba Network adapters."
"The most valuable features of SAP Process Orchestration are the standard APIs that we can use."
 

Cons

"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"Confluent has a good monitoring tool, but it's not customizable."
"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."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"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."
"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."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"The solution is not very scalable because it is at the end of its life."
"It would be beneficial to enhance the ease of implementing new projects and improve overall stability in our implementations."
"The solution could improve by making it more user-friendly by limiting the code required. We have to add some code in some cases where we need complex logic or some other functions. If this was able to be done in a more simplified manner then it would save a lot of effort and time."
"The solution could be more scalable."
"It requires some maintenance."
"Data modeling is an area of concern in the product where improvements are required."
"The cloud capability features need improvement."
"It is scalable, but there can be performance issues with high data volume or traffic, especially during month ends."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"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 expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"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."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"It comes with a high cost."
"The cost of SAP products is quite high but the quality is really good."
"The product is not a low-priced solution, but I can say that it is competitively priced in the market."
"The license is a one-time payment, and additional costs are only incurred on the infrastructure side since it's an on-premise solution."
"It is a very expensive solution. We only pay for the license."
"There are fees in addition to the licensing."
"The pricing for this solution is fine."
"My company deals with different pricing models of the product, according to which we don't pay for the solution directly, but we do pay for the maintenance part."
"The fee for maintenance is costly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Insurance Company
5%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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?
I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team. The lack of easy access to the Confluent support team is also a...
What do you like most about SAP Process Orchestration?
It provides essential features such as continuous monitoring of all interfaces are crucial for our needs.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SAP Process Orchestration?
SAP solutions are generally expensive. SAP Process Orchestration was integrated with SAP ECC in a package, but my customers have consistently described it as an expensive product.
What needs improvement with SAP Process Orchestration?
The user interface of SAP Process Orchestration should be more modern to enhance its appeal. It can seem complicated and outdated to new users. Additionally, the tool relies on Java, which feels le...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SAP NetWeaver Process Integration, NetWeaver Process Integration
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Lenovo, Dansk Supermarked A/S, Ego Pharmaceuticals Pty. Ltd, Kaeser Kompressoren
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. SAP Process Orchestration and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.