Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
WSO2 Stream Processor Logo

Top 10 WSO2 Stream Processor Alternatives

Vendor: WSO2
    Leave a review

    Top WSO2 Stream Processor Competitors

    Discover the top alternatives and competitors to WSO2 Stream Processor based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Apache Flink, Apache Spark Streaming, and Apache Pulsar. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.

    WSO2 Stream Processor surpasses its competitors by offering real-time data processing with high scalability, low latency, and advanced analytics capabilities, enabling businesses to optimize performance and make data-driven decisions quickly and efficiently.

    WSO2 Alternatives Report

    Learn what solutions real users are comparing with WSO2, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
    Get the alternatives report
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Apache Flink
    3.9 out of 5
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Apache Flink
    3.9 out of 5
    Apache Flink attracts those seeking strong scalability and community support for real-time data processing. In comparison, WSO2 Stream Processor appeals with its robust integration capabilities and enterprise features, ideal for complex organizational needs. Each provides unique advantages depending on specific business requirements.
    Apache Flink has no initial setup cost, enhancing accessibility for various users, while WSO2 Stream Processor involves a more substantial setup investment, potentially limiting its appeal to those seeking a low-cost entry point.
    View comparison
    Pricing
    Apache Flink has no initial setup cost, enhancing accessibility for various users, while WSO2 Stream Processor involves a more substantial setup investment, potentially limiting its appeal to those seeking a low-cost entry point.
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Apache Spark Streaming
    3.9 out of 5
    Apache Spark Streaming is preferred for scalability and seamless integration, attractive to those needing broad data-processing capabilities. In comparison, WSO2 Stream Processor, with its comprehensive analytics features, suits buyers seeking advanced event processing despite higher initial costs and complex deployment.
    Apache Spark Streaming has an affordable setup cost, while WSO2 Stream Processor requires a higher initial investment, highlighting the cost differential between the two streaming solutions.
    View comparison
    Pricing
    Apache Spark Streaming has an affordable setup cost, while WSO2 Stream Processor requires a higher initial investment, highlighting the cost differential between the two streaming solutions.
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Apache Pulsar
    4.0 out of 5
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Apache Pulsar
    4.0 out of 5
    WSO2 Stream Processor attracts tech buyers with its powerful integration and real-time analytics. In comparison, Apache Pulsar appeals for its robust scalability and messaging capabilities. Buyers may choose WSO2 for its simplicity or Pulsar for handling complex, large-scale streaming needs.
    WSO2 Stream Processor typically has higher setup costs, while Apache Pulsar may offer a more budget-friendly option.
    View comparison
    Pricing
    WSO2 Stream Processor typically has higher setup costs, while Apache Pulsar may offer a more budget-friendly option.
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Cloudera DataFlow
    3.7 out of 5
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Cloudera DataFlow
    3.7 out of 5
    Cloudera DataFlow offers scalability and strong security, attracting businesses needing performance. In comparison, WSO2 Stream Processor provides advanced real-time analytics and flexibility, making it ideal for feature-centric buyers aiming to maximize ROI while managing complex deployments with detailed documentation support.
    Cloudera DataFlow requires a higher setup cost, while WSO2 Stream Processor presents a more budget-friendly initial setup option.
    View comparison
    Pricing
    Cloudera DataFlow requires a higher setup cost, while WSO2 Stream Processor presents a more budget-friendly initial setup option.
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Software AG Apama
    3.5 out of 5
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Software AG Apama
    3.5 out of 5
    Software AG Apama provides rapid analytics and extensive event processing with low-latency performance. In comparison, WSO2 Stream Processor emphasizes integration, predictive analytics, and adaptability. Apama's high ROI contrasts with WSO2’s lower cost of entry, providing diverse options for varying business needs.
    Software AG Apama involves a higher setup cost compared to WSO2 Stream Processor, which offers a more cost-effective implementation.
    View comparison
    Pricing
    Software AG Apama involves a higher setup cost compared to WSO2 Stream Processor, which offers a more cost-effective implementation.

    Related categories

    Streaming Analytics
    Complex Event Processing (CEP)