We performed a comparison between AWS Glue and Confluent based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Of the two solutions, users like the integration capabilities of Confluent. In addition, users appreciate that there is an open source version of Confluent and also mention an ROI. For these reasons, Confluent wins out in this comparison.
"We have found it beneficial when moving data from one source to another."
"Data catalog and triggers are the two best features for me. AWS Glue has its own data catalog, which makes it great and really easy to use. Triggers are also really good for scheduling the ETL process."
"AWS Glue's best features are scalability and cloud-based features."
"Its user interface is quite good. You just need to choose some options to create a job in AWS Glue. The code-generation feature is also useful. If you don't want to customize it and simply want to read a file and store the data in the database, it can generate the code for you."
"I also like that you can add custom libraries like JAR files and use them. So, the ability to use a fast processing engine and embed basic jobs easily are significant advantages."
"Glue is a NoSQL-based data ETL tool that has some advantages over IIS and ISAs."
"The solution's technical support is good. Whenever we raise a use case where we face an issue in our company, we get a response from the solution's technical team."
"AWS Glue's most valuable features are the data catalog, including crawlers and tables, and Glue Studio, which means you don't have to use custom code."
"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 tools."
"A person with a good IT background and HTML will not have any trouble with Confluent."
"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 feature of Confluent is the wide range of features provided. They're leading the market in this category."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"In terms of performance, if they can further optimize the execution time for serverless jobs, it would be a welcome improvement."
"The interface for AWS Glue could improve, they do not put a lot of details. You can write the code, in PySpark or in Scala, which is a big advantage, it is only easy to use for a developer. It will be difficult for new users to enter the cloud environment."
"I would like to see a more robust interface on the no-code side. This would be nice to be able to split cells."
"I would like to see stable libraries at the moment they are not there."
"I haven't looked into Glue in terms of seeking out flaws. I've not come across missing features."
"The crucial problem with AWS Glue is that it only works with AWS. It is not an agnostic tool like Pentaho. In PowerCenter, we can install the forms from Google and other vendors, but in the case of AWS Glue, we can only use AWS."
"In terms of improvement, the performance of AWS Glue could be faster."
"The solution's visual ETL tool is of no use for actual implementation."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"It could be more user-friendly and centralized. A way to reduce redundancy would be helpful."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"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."
"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."
AWS Glue is ranked 1st in Cloud Data Integration with 37 reviews while Confluent is ranked 4th in Streaming Analytics with 21 reviews. AWS Glue is rated 7.8, while Confluent is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of AWS Glue writes "Provides serverless mechanism, easy data transformation and automated infrastructure management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Confluent writes "Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming ". AWS Glue is most compared with AWS Database Migration Service, Informatica PowerCenter, Informatica Cloud Data Integration, SSIS and SnapLogic, whereas Confluent is most compared with Amazon MSK, Amazon Kinesis, Databricks, Oracle GoldenGate and Fivetran. See our AWS Glue vs. Confluent report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Data Integration reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.