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

Confluent vs Toad Data Point 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)
Toad Data Point
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (29th), Data Preparation Tools (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Confluent and Toad Data Point aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Confluent is designed for Streaming Analytics and holds a mindshare of 8.2%, down 11.2% compared to last year.
Toad Data Point, on the other hand, focuses on Data Integration, holds 0.5% mindshare, up 0.4% since last year.
Streaming Analytics
Data Integration
 

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.
Aaron Payne - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers power developers the tooling they need
I am not the end user of this solution. I am not close enough to it because I manage the platform that it runs against. The end users who use the Toad tool come against the database that my team manages, so it is hard for me to provide any area for improvement when it comes to the Toad tool. However, in the administration case, cost is a significant issue. The Mac license is incredibly expensive. It is 1,600 dollars each, which is more than the Windows version. Scalability is difficult when it is that costly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"The most valuable feature of Confluent is the wide range of features provided. They're leading the market in this category."
"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."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"The most valuable features of Toad Data are you could write a parameterized query and it wouldn't error out, it would give you the parameters that you could input. The auto-formatting feature is useful because it was great for keeping your queries neat and understandable. The auto comment, and uncomment toggles that you could do were convenient."
"With Toad Data Point, I can automate most steps automatically."
"It provides better SQL development tooling than SQL Developer, which is not a sufficient tool for all development use cases. It offers power developers the tools they need."
"The Connectivity and Connection Manager supports a broad number of connection types, and it is trivial for end-users to set up their own connections to sources."
"I have never experienced any issues with customer service."
"The best thing about it is its automation features."
"One of the greatest features is that you can get data from anywhere to anywhere with Toad Data Point."
"We love it."
 

Cons

"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."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"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."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"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."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"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."
"I used their report writing a little bit, however, it could improve since it's not a really good report writer and it's a little clunky."
"The Mac license is incredibly expensive. It is 1,600 dollars each, which is more than the Windows version."
"I used their report writing a little bit, however, it could improve since it's not a really good report writer and it's a little clunky."
"It's not user-friendly. Once you start using it, you eventually get to know the features."
"On the scheduling server, some scheduled reports just sit there and never execute for the first time. After manually executing the first time, they run with no issues."
"Toad Data could improve by having additional features, such as query prediction. This could help someone who's not the strongest programmer. If the software could help them write queries correctly it would be very helpful, especially for small development teams or teams that lack the input skills necessary to write and program efficiently."
"The Mac license is incredibly expensive. It is 1,600 dollars each, which is more than the Windows version. Scalability is difficult when it is that costly."
"It's not user-friendly. Once you start using it, you eventually get to know the features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 highly priced."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"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."
"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 cheaper than other products."
"The price of Toad Data Point was approximately $500 annually."
"The Mac licenses are expensive, costing 1,600 dollars each. This is much higher than for the Windows version. I maintain a very limited number of licenses due to this cost."
"The cost of this product is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
36%
Healthcare Company
12%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Toad Data Point?
The pricing for Toad Data Point is where it gets into trouble. Microsoft is free, so if you get SQL Server, you get all the other stuff with it. You have to use several Microsoft tools that don't a...
What needs improvement with Toad Data Point?
I used their report writing a little bit, however, it could improve since it's not a really good report writer and it's a little clunky.
What is your primary use case for Toad Data Point?
When I use it, I'm using it for writing SQL or testing SQL code. I used to use it for moving data, loading files into database tables, from tables to other tables.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Concordia University
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. Toad Data Point and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.