We compared Confluent and Amazon MSK based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Based on user feedback, Confluent is valued for its efficient data processing, integration capabilities, and comprehensive monitoring tools. Users appreciate its supportive customer service and mixed sentiments about cost and setup. In comparison, Amazon MSK is praised for its ease of use, scalability, reliability and competitive pricing. Areas for improvement include scalability, ease of use, and cost management.
Features: Confluent stands out with its efficient data processing, seamless integration with various systems, and comprehensive monitoring capabilities. On the other hand, Amazon MSK is praised for its ease of use, scalability, and reliability.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Confluent products has mixed sentiments among users, with some finding it manageable but others considering it complex. On the other hand, Amazon MSK offers an easy setup process without any additional costs, making it a more convenient option., Confluent's product has a strong ROI according to user feedback, while Amazon MSK users reported positive outcomes and benefits, indicating high value and effectiveness.
Room for Improvement: Confluent could improve the user interface, simplify setup, provide better documentation, enhance system responsiveness, and speed for seamless data streaming and processing. Amazon MSK should focus on scalability, ease of use, cost management, and offer a more intuitive interface, flexible pricing models, and better scalability options.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews for Confluent and Amazon MSK regarding the duration required to establish a new tech solution vary greatly. Users' experiences with Confluent range from three months for deployment and one week for setup, while there is no information available for Amazon MSK., Confluent's customer service is highly regarded, with prompt and efficient support. Users appreciate the knowledgeable and friendly staff, resolving issues effectively. In contrast, Amazon MSK receives positive comments for its excellent customer service and support.
The summary above is based on 16 interviews we conducted recently with Confluent and Amazon MSK users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Overall, it is very cost-effective based on the workflow."
"MSK has a private network that's an out-of-box feature."
"It offers good stability."
"Amazon MSK has significantly improved our organization by building seamless integration between systems."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon MSK is the integration."
"Amazon MSK has good integration because our team has been undergoing significant changes. Coupling it with MSK within AWS is helpful. We don't have to set up additionals or monitor external environments. This"
"It is a stable product."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"The most valuable feature that we are using is the data replication between the data centers allowing us to configure a disaster recovery or software. However, is it's not mandatory to use and because most of the features that we use are from Apache Kafka, such as end-to-end encryption. Internally, we can develop our own kind of product or service from Apache Kafka."
"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."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"With Confluent Cloud we no longer need to handle the infrastructure and the plumbing, which is a concern for Confluent. The other advantage is that all portfolios have access to the data that is being shared."
"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"It does not autoscale. Because if you do keep it manually when you add a note to the cluster and then you register it, then it is scalable, but the fact that you have to go and do it, I think, makes it, again, a bit of some operational overhead when managing the cluster."
"Amazon MSK could improve on the features they offer. They are still lagging behind Confluence."
"It should be more flexible, integration-wise."
"The configuration seems a little complex and the documentation on the product is not available."
"The product's schema support needs enhancement. It will help enhance integration with many kinds of languages of programming languages, especially for environments using languages like .NET."
"It would be really helpful if Amazon MSK could provide a single installation that covers all the servers."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"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."
"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"It could be more user-friendly and centralized. A way to reduce redundancy would be helpful."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"Confluent has a good monitoring tool, but it's not customizable."
Amazon MSK is ranked 6th in Streaming Analytics with 7 reviews while Confluent is ranked 4th in Streaming Analytics with 21 reviews. Amazon MSK is rated 7.2, while Confluent is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Amazon MSK writes "Streamlines our processes, and we don't need to configure any VPCs; it's automatic". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Confluent writes "Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming ". Amazon MSK is most compared with Amazon Kinesis, Azure Stream Analytics, Google Cloud Dataflow, Apache Flink and Aiven for Apache Kafka, whereas Confluent is most compared with Amazon Kinesis, Databricks, AWS Glue, Oracle GoldenGate and Fivetran. See our Amazon MSK vs. Confluent report.
See our list of best Streaming Analytics vendors.
We monitor all Streaming Analytics 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.