We performed a comparison between Confluent and IBM Cloud Pak for Integration based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"A person with a good IT background and HTML will not have any trouble with 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 tools."
"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"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."
"Cloud Pak for Integration is definitely scalable. That is the most important criteria."
"The most preferable aspect would be the elimination of the command, which was a significant improvement. In the past, it was a challenge, but now we can proceed smoothly with the implementation of our policies and everything is managed through JCP. It's still among the positive aspects, and it's a valuable feature."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable aspect of the Cloud Pak, in general, is the flexibility that you have to use the product."
"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 no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"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."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"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."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"The pricing can be improved."
"Setting up Cloud Pak for Integration is relatively complex. It's not as easy because it has not yet been fully integrated. You still have some products that are still not containerized, so you still have to run them on a dedicated VM."
"Its queuing and messaging features need improvement."
"The initial setup is not easy."
More IBM Cloud Pak for Integration Pricing and Cost Advice →
Confluent is ranked 4th in Streaming Analytics with 20 reviews while IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is ranked 14th in Cloud Data Integration with 4 reviews. Confluent is rated 8.4, while IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Confluent writes "Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Cloud Pak for Integration writes "A hybrid integration platform that applies the functionality of closed-loop AI automation". Confluent is most compared with Amazon MSK, Amazon Kinesis, Databricks, AWS Glue and Oracle GoldenGate, whereas IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is most compared with IBM App Connect, IBM API Connect, IBM DataPower Gateway and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager. See our Confluent vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Integration 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.