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

Confluent vs Upsolver 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
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Upsolver
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
20th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (37th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Confluent is 6.8%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Upsolver is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Confluent6.8%
Upsolver0.7%
Other92.5%
Streaming Analytics
 

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.
reviewer2784462 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Streaming pipelines have become simpler and onboarding new data sources is now much faster
One of the best features Upsolver offers is the automatic schema evolution. Another good feature is SQL-based streaming transformations. Complex streaming transformations such as cleansing, deduplication, and enrichment were implemented using SQL and drastically reduced the need for custom Spark code. My experience with the SQL-based streaming transformations in Upsolver is that it had a significant positive impact on the overall data engineering workflow. By replacing custom Spark streaming jobs with declarative SQL logic, I simplified development, review, and deployment processes. Data transformations such as parsing, filtering, enrichment, and deduplication could be implemented and modified quickly without rebuilding or redeploying complex code-based pipelines. Upsolver has impacted my organization positively because it brings many benefits. The first one is faster onboarding of new data sources. Another one is more reliable streaming pipelines. Another one is near-real-time data availability, which is very important for us. It also reduced operational effort for data engineering teams. A specific outcome that highlights these benefits is that the time to onboard new sources is reduced from weeks to days. Custom Spark code reduction reached 50 to 40 percent. Pipeline failures are reduced by 70 to 80 percent. Data latency is improved from hours to minutes.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
"Confluent facilitates the messaging tasks with Kafka, streamlining our processes effectively."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"A person with a good IT background and HTML will not have any trouble with Confluent."
"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"A specific outcome that highlights these benefits is that the time to onboard new sources is reduced from weeks to days, custom Spark code reduction reached 50 to 40 percent, pipeline failures are reduced by 70 to 80 percent, and data latency is improved from hours to minutes."
"Customer service is excellent, and I would rate it between eight point five to nine out of ten."
"The most prominent feature of Upsolver is its function as an ETL tool, allowing data to be moved across platforms and different data technologies."
"It was easy to use and set up, with a nearly no-code interface that relied mostly on drag-and-drop functionality."
 

Cons

"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."
"Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools."
"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 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."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in query tuning."
"On the stability side, I would rate it seven out of ten. Using multiple cloud providers and data engineering technologies creates complexity, and managing different plugins is not always easy, but they are working on it."
"Upsolver excels in ETL and data aggregation, while ThoughtSpot is strong in natural language processing for querying datasets. Combining these tools can be very effective: Upsolver handles aggregation and ETL, and ThoughtSpot allows for natural language queries. There’s potential for highlighting these integrations in the future."
"I think that Upsolver can be improved in orchestration because it is not a full orchestration tool."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Upsolver is affordable at approximately $225 per terabyte per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 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%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
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 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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Upsolver?
Upsolver is affordable at approximately $225 per terabyte per year. Compared to what I know from others, it's cheaper than many other products.
What needs improvement with Upsolver?
There is room for improvement in query tuning. Upsolver could do a more in-depth analysis in employing machine power, such as CPU and memory, to enhance query performance. Furthermore, allocating C...
What is your primary use case for Upsolver?
I am working as a consultant and currently have my own consultancy services. I provide services to companies that are data-heavy and looking for data engineering solutions for their business needs....
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. Upsolver and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.