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

Confluent vs TIBCO Spotfire 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 (5th)
TIBCO Spotfire
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
74
Ranking in other categories
BI (Business Intelligence) Tools (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Confluent and TIBCO Spotfire aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Confluent is designed for Streaming Analytics and holds a mindshare of 6.8%, down 8.7% compared to last year.
TIBCO Spotfire, on the other hand, focuses on BI (Business Intelligence) Tools, holds 1.1% mindshare, up 1.0% since last year.
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Confluent6.8%
Apache Flink12.3%
Databricks10.0%
Other70.9%
Streaming Analytics
BI (Business Intelligence) Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
TIBCO Spotfire1.1%
Microsoft Power BI9.4%
Tableau Enterprise6.7%
Other82.8%
BI (Business Intelligence) Tools
 

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.
reviewer2774796 - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Governance System Specialist at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Clinical teams have transformed trial data into real-time, governed insights for faster decisions
Our client was a biotech company whose clinical pipeline was expanding with teams across clinical operations, biometrics, safety, and translational sciences. All these organizations and departments were drowning in data. Every week, teams stitched together different PowerPoint decks, SAS listings, spreadsheets, and extracts from central labs, CTMS, and warehouses. The problem was not a lack of data but a lack of timely insights. We were constantly asked which sites were falling behind, whether there was any worrying safety drift, or which biomarkers were correlating with response. Analysts would manually rerun scripts or pull static listings, which resulted in delays ranging from two weeks to a month. There were also many inconsistencies in definitions between ORR, PFS censoring rules, and protocol deviation categories, causing confusion and rework. Our client wanted a single analytic environment to serve as a one-stop place where their teams could explore, visualize, and collaborate in real time while maintaining security and regulatory expectations. TIBCO Spotfire became their live analytics workspace. Previously, teams had to collect emailed spreadsheets and various documents. By having one combined place, teams could open dynamic dashboards that were directly governed by curated datasets. The data canvas showed every transformation step, which helped the client maintain traceability for audits. Data functions written in R or Python allowed statisticians to encode and have approved analytic methods that could be used everywhere. Before implementing the tool, we built a framework and strategy. First, we mapped their high-value pain points including trial enrollment forecasting, safety drift monitoring, protocol deviation detection, and biomarker response analysis. Based on these priorities, we defined common language and common rules by aligning calculations with CDISC standards and creating shared data functions for lab shift rules and biomarker classifications. This prevented inconsistent interpretations across studies. We then built the technical foundation by connecting TIBCO Spotfire securely to their EDC, R environment, data lake, and row-level security to ensure adherence to PHI, PII, and regulatory compliances. Clinical operations dashboards provided real-time insights into enrollments and deviations. Safety dashboards were deployed to visualize patterns, biomarker distributions, and tumor burden changes for their cancer-related drug studies. The business validated the dashboards based on GxP principles, and we trained the study teams and built new templates so that trials could launch analytics much faster.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"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."
"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."
"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"Confluent facilitates the messaging tasks with Kafka, streamlining our processes effectively."
"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"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."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"I appreciate Spotfire's range of visualization options, advanced analytics features, and seamless integration with other TIBCO products."
"Data discovery is very simple."
"From a scalability standpoint, I would say it's pretty fantastic."
"TIBCO Spotfire offers excellent features, including flexibility and the ability to do much better compared to other analytical tools."
"Spotfire is excellent for scientific applications, especially because of its integration with RNG."
"Live Query data on demand, R and Python integration, and the ability to write HTML and JavaScript text areas are all valuable features."
"We used it pretty heavily in gathering data, which goes to our VPs. They are able to base their next revenue planning based on this metric. So, it has been invaluable."
"The most valuable feature is the map visuals that help us connect to the geo-specialized data which is more advanced than other solutions."
 

Cons

"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"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."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"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."
"there is room for improvement in the visualization."
"Confluent has a good monitoring tool, but it's not customizable."
"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."
"Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools."
"TIBCO Spotfire can be improved in several areas. The UI can be enhanced, and the usage and flexibility need to be better compared to other analytical tools."
"Personalising Spotfire, as a whole, is painful and is something that could be made easier."
"The layered features within Spotfire can make it a bit complicated sometimes as compared to Power BI."
"The initial setup can be difficult."
"The design of the UI could be improved."
"The number of charts available out of the box in Spotfire can be enhanced."
"I would like to see the visualization library in this solution expanded, so that I can increase what I can offer to our clients."
"The solution might be generic."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"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."
"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."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"It comes with a high cost."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"The solution is affordable one."
"The ROI is nearly impossible to calculate."
"In comparison to other solutions such as IBM Cognos, TIBCO Spotfire is more affordable."
"I would describe TIBCO Spotfire as an averagely-priced product."
"The cost of TIBCO Spotfire could improve. It should be less expensive. It's the most expensive visualization tool in our company."
"This product carries a monthly licensing charge, with the amount depending on the features that are to be included. This costs also covers the use of technical support."
"The pricing seems competitive and reasonable. The value delivered by the product far exceeds the cost."
"The cost is a few hundred dollars per user per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business18
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise42
 

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 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 do you like most about TIBCO Spotfire?
TIBCO Spotfire is easy to use. We initiated Spotfire as POC, with support from a tech team based in South Africa. While they assisted with the setup, we conducted the POC ourselves.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TIBCO Spotfire?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for TIBCO Spotfire appears fair, and I think they are fairly priced as far as the features are concerned.
What needs improvement with TIBCO Spotfire?
TIBCO Spotfire can be improved in several areas. The UI can be enhanced, and the usage and flexibility need to be better compared to other analytical tools.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Spotfire
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Allergan, ASSS de Montreal, Avantium, Blue River, Bank of Montreal, Citibank, FrieslandCampina, Hellmann Logistics, Merck, Novartis
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. TIBCO Spotfire and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.