Confluent vs IBM Cloud Pak for Integration comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Confluent
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (4th)
IBM Cloud Pak for Integration
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
API Management (23rd), Cloud Data Integration (14th)
 

Market share comparison

As of June 2024, in the Cloud Data Integration category, the market share of Confluent is 3.4% and it decreased by 46.3% compared to the previous year. The market share of IBM Cloud Pak for Integration is 1.5% and it increased by 42.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Data Integration
Unique Categories:
Streaming Analytics
8.3%
API Management
0.4%
 

Featured Reviews

Yantao Zhao - PeerSpot reviewer
May 9, 2024
Great tool for sharing knowledge, internal communication and allows for real-time collaboration on pages
Confluence is easy to use and modify. However, sometimes there are too many pages. We have to reorganize the folder or parent account. Since everyone can create a page, the same knowledge might be created in multiple places by different people. This leads to redundancy and makes it difficult to find information. It's not centralized. So it could be more user-friendly and centralized. A way to reduce redundancy would be helpful. It's very easy to use, so everyone can create knowledge. But it would be good to synchronize and organize that information a bit better. Another improvement would be in Confluence search. You can search for keywords, but it's not like AI, not even ChatGPT or OpenAI. It would be nice to get more relevant or organized answers. If you're outside the company, you just get some titles containing the keyword you input. But if Confluence were like a database, you could input something and get a well-organized search offering from multiple pages.
Neelima Golla - PeerSpot reviewer
Oct 6, 2023
A hybrid integration platform that applies the functionality of closed-loop AI automation
I recommend using it because, in today's context, the cloud plays a significant role. Within the same user interface, you can develop applications and manage multiple applications, making it a more user-friendly option. Moreover, you can explore various other technologies while deploying on the cloud, broadening your knowledge of cloud technologies. In my case, the transition led to my learning of Kubernetes, enabling multi-scaling and expanding my technical skills. It was a valuable experience, and I had the opportunity to learn many new things during the migration process. I can easily rate it an eight or nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"A person with a good IT background and HTML will not have any trouble with Confluent."
"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."
"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."
"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"The most valuable feature of Confluent is the wide range of features provided. They're leading the market in this category."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"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."
"Cloud Pak for Integration is definitely scalable. That is the most important criteria."
"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."
 

Cons

"there is room for improvement in the visualization."
"Confluent has a good monitoring tool, but it's not customizable."
"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"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."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"Its queuing and messaging features need improvement."
"The initial setup is not easy."
"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."
"The pricing can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"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."
"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."
"It comes with a high cost."
"It is an expensive solution."
"The solution's pricing model is very flexible."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
787,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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?
I would rate the pricing of Confluent as average, around a five out of ten. Additional costs could include features like multi-tenancy support and native encryption with custom algorithms, which wo...
What needs improvement with Confluent?
Confluence is easy to use and modify. However, sometimes there are too many pages. We have to reorganize the folder or parent account. Since everyone can create a page, the same knowledge might be ...
What do you like most about IBM Cloud Pak for Integration?
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 ...
What is your primary use case for IBM Cloud Pak for Integration?
The use cases involve connecting and converting data from one system to another, often involving alterations in the data's format or structure.
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
CVS Health Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Integration and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.