Apache Flink vs Confluent comparison

Read 25 Confluent reviews

6,849 Views
4,041 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Apache Flink

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Confluent and Apache Flink compete in the data streaming and processing domain. Confluent generally takes the upper hand in interconnectivity and integrated solutions, whereas Apache Flink excels in robust processing features, scalability, and advanced stream analytics.

Features: Confluent leverages its comprehensive Kafka integration, offering seamless data streams, scalability, and a variety of connectors. Its user-friendly interface and integrated platform make it a leading choice for enterprises seeking efficient stream processing. Apache Flink stands out with its advanced real-time data processing features, low-latency operations, and stateful event processing capabilities, ideal for sophisticated data computations. The checkpointing and savepointing features in Flink enable effective state management, allowing recovery and continuity in case of failures.

Room for Improvement: Confluent could benefit from enhanced documentation and reducing initial setup costs to lower entry barriers. While its integrations are comprehensive, further expansion of connector support would be advantageous. For Apache Flink, improving user support and providing more tailored deployment assistance would address the needs of less technically proficient users. Simplifying its setup process and enhancing community engagement for broader technical support could also be beneficial.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Confluent offers straightforward deployment, particularly within Kafka environments, supported by a solid customer service model that enhances operational efficiency. Apache Flink provides flexible deployment options, accommodating bespoke solutions with the requirement of technical proficiency for optimal setup. Its adaptability allows for advanced customization but demands in-depth technical knowledge for seamless implementation.

Pricing and ROI: Confluent's initial setup costs are higher due to its integrated platform, but it often justifies this with strong ROI through enhanced efficiency in Kafka-based implementations. Apache Flink offers a cost-effective open-source model, appealing to organizations capable of leveraging its advanced functionalities for complex real-time analytics, providing financial flexibility and substantial ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Apache Flink vs. Confluent Report (Updated: September 2026).

Apache Flink vs. Confluent

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,574 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Apache Flink

Ranking in Streaming Analytics

3rd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Confluent

Ranking in Streaming Analytics

7th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Apache Flink is 6.7%, down from 14.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Confluent is 6.1%, down from 7.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Apache Flink	6.7%
Confluent	6.1%
Other	87.2%

Streaming Analytics

Featured Reviews

Sanjay Srivastava

Software Architect at IBM

Streaming workflows have improved data integration and support real-time pipelines across platforms

We are not using Apache Flink in its advanced window capabilities. We are using the Apache Flink job in Apache SeaTunnel, meaning we can write the code inside Apache SeaTunnel. Currently, we are moving; both solutions are there. We are doing it on-premises with the help of Kubernetes and OpenShift. The main reason why Apache Flink is better is that it has more functions, and being open source with easy code in Apache SeaTunnel helps us achieve that. Cost is a major issue. I would rate the stability of the product as an eight. For Apache Flink, the final point can be rated an eight. I can recommend Apache Flink to other users for streaming support, and I am recommending it. I would rate this review an eight overall.

Read full review

PavanManepalli

AVP - Sr Middleware Messaging Integration Engineer at Wells Fargo

Has supported streaming use cases across data centers and simplifies fraud analytics with SQL-based processing

I recommend that Confluent should improve its solution to keep up with competitors in the market, such as Solace and other upcoming tools such as NATS. Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools. They need to improve in that direction by not only reducing costs but also providing better solutions for the problems customers face to avoid frustrations, whether through future enhancement requests or ensuring product stability. The cost should be worked on, and they should provide better solutions for customers. Solutions should focus on hierarchical topics; if a customer has different types of data and sources, they should be able to send them to the same place for analytics. Currently, Confluent requires everything to send to the same topic, which becomes very large and makes running analytics difficult. The hierarchy of topics should be improved. This part is available in MQ and other products such as Solace, but it is missing in Confluent, leading many in capital markets and trading to switch to Solace. In terms of stability, it is not the stability itself that needs improvement but rather the delivery semantics. Other products offer exactly-once delivery out of the box, whereas Confluent states it will offer this but lacks the knobs or levers for tuning configurations effectively. Confluent has hundreds of configurations that application teams must understand, which creates a gap. Users are often unaware of what values to set for better performance or to achieve exactly-once semantics, making it difficult to navigate through them. Delivery semantics also need to be worked on.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Another feature is how Flink handles its radiuses. It has something called the checkpointing concept. You're dealing with billions and billions of requests, so your system is going to fail in large storage systems. Flink handles this by using the concept of checkpointing and savepointing, where they write the aggregated state into some separate storage. So in case of failure, you can basically recall from that state and come back."

"The top feature of Apache Flink is its low latency for fast, real-time data. Another great feature is the real-time indicators and alerts which make a big difference when it comes to data processing and analysis."

"Apache Flink is meant for low latency applications. You take one event opposite if you want to maintain a certain state. When another event comes and you want to associate those events together, in-memory state management was a key feature for us."

"We value this solution's intricate system because it comes with a state inside the mechanism and product, allowing us to process batch data, stream to real-time and build pipelines, and we do not need to process data from the beginning when we pause as we can continue from the same point where we stopped, helping us save time as 95% of our pipelines will now be on Amazon and we'll save money by saving time."

"The end-to-end latency was drastically reduced, and our capability of handling high throughput has increased by using Flink."

"Apache Flink offers a range of powerful configurations and experiences for development teams. Its strength lies in its development experience and capabilities."

"Apache Flink's best feature is its data streaming tool."

"This is truly a real-time solution."

More Apache Flink pros

"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."

"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."

"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."

"The features I find most useful in Confluent are the Multi-Region Cluster, MRC, and the Cluster Linking for replication."

"The biggest benefit of Confluent as a tool is that it is a distributed platform that provides more durability and stability."

"With Confluent Cloud we no longer need to handle the infrastructure and the plumbing, which is a concern for Confluent, and the other advantage is that all portfolios have access to the data that is being shared."

"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."

"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."

More Confluent pros

Cons

"One way to improve Flink would be to enhance integration between different ecosystems. For example, there could be more integration with other big data vendors and platforms similar in scope to how Apache Flink works with Cloudera. Apache Flink is a part of the same ecosystem as Cloudera, and for batch processing it's actually very useful but for real-time processing there could be more development with regards to the big data capabilities amongst the various ecosystems out there."

"One way to improve Flink would be to enhance integration between different ecosystems."

"Flink has become a lot more stable but the machine learning library is still not very flexible."

"There is a learning curve. It takes time to learn."

"Apache Flink is very powerful, but it can be challenging for beginners because it requires prior experience with similar tools and technologies, such as Kafka and batch processing."

"I am using the Python API and I have found the solution to be underdeveloped compared to others. There needs to be better integration with notebooks to allow for more practical development."

"There is room for improvement in the initial setup process."

"Apache should provide more examples and sample code related to streaming to help me better adapt and utilize the tool."

More Apache Flink cons

"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."

"It could have more integration with different platforms."

"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."

"The pricing was high for our needs. We should not have to pay for features we do not use."

"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."

"The solution could have an extra plugin or upgrading feature. In addition, it could have more integration with different platforms and be more compatible."

"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."

"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."

More Confluent cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's an open-source solution."

"It's an open source."

"This is an open-source platform that can be used free of charge."

"The solution is open-source, which is free."

"Apache Flink is open source so we pay no licensing for the use of the software."

"Confluent is an expensive solution."

"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."

"The solution is cheaper than other products."

"You have to pay additional for one or two features."

"On a scale from one to ten, where one is low pricing and ten is high pricing, I would rate Confluent's pricing at five. I have not encountered any additional costs."

"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."

"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."

"Regarding pricing, I think Confluent is a premium product, but it's hard for me to say definitively if it's overly expensive. We're still trying to understand if the features and reduced maintenance complexity justify the cost, especially as we scale our platform use."

More Confluent pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Retailer

15%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

14%

Retailer

12%

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	12

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	17

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Apache Flink?

Apache could improve Apache Flink by providing more functionality, as they need to fully support data integration. The connectors are still very few for Apache Flink. There is a lack of functionali...

What is your primary use case for Apache Flink?

I am working with Apache Flink, which is the tool we use for data integration. Apache Flink is for data, and we are working on the data integration project, not big data, using Apache Flink and Apa...

What advice do you have for others considering Apache Flink?

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Confluent?

They charge a lot for scaling, which makes it expensive.

What needs improvement with Confluent?

What is your primary use case for Confluent?

The main use cases for Confluent are log aggregation and streaming. I'm familiar with Confluent stream processing with KSQL. KSQL helps in terms of data analytics strategies because if we are the d...

Spring Cloud Data Flow vs Apache Flink

Comparisons

Compared 7% of the time

Azure Stream Analytics vs Apache Flink

Compared 7% of the time

Amazon Kinesis vs Apache Flink

Compared 7% of the time

Google Cloud Dataflow vs Apache Flink

Compared 6% of the time

Apache Pulsar vs Apache Flink

Compared 5% of the time

More Apache Flink Competitors

Palantir Foundry vs Confluent

Compared 9% of the time

Azure Stream Analytics vs Confluent

Compared 7% of the time

Databricks vs Confluent

Compared 6% of the time

Amazon Kinesis vs Confluent

Compared 6% of the time

More Confluent Competitors

Product Reports

Download Apache Flink product report

Apache Flink

October 2026

Download Confluent product report

October 2026

Also Known As

Flink

No data available

Overview

Apache Flink is a powerful open-source framework for stateful computations over data streams, designed for both real-time and batch processing. It efficiently handles massive volumes of data with low-latency responses, offering versatility for complex event processing scenarios.

Apache Flink excels in processing high-throughput data streams, enabling seamless state management across distributed applications. Users appreciate its robust features like stateful transformations and checkpointing, simplifying deployment in diverse environments. Though powerful, it poses challenges for beginners due to its complexity and limited documentation, requiring some prior experience to master. Its flexible integration with systems like Kafka and support for Kubernetes on AWS makes it suitable for demanding environments where quick, real-time analysis is essential.

What are the key features of Apache Flink?

Stateful Transformations: Allows complex stateful operations on data streams with precise handling.
Low Latency: Ensures real-time data processing with minimal delays.
Checkpointing: Provides efficient and reliable checkpointing for fault tolerance.
Kafka Integration: Easy integration with Kafka for seamless data ingestion and processing.
API Support: Provides robust APIs for diverse data processing needs.
Flexible Deployment: Offers options for deploying on-premise or in cloud environments.

What benefits should users look for?

Versatility: Supports both batch and stream processing in a unified model.
Community Support: Backed by an active community that continuously enhances its features.
Ease of Use: Simplifies the coding process compared to similar frameworks like Apache Storm.
Real-Time Analytics: Facilitates immediate insights and data-driven decision-making.

Organizations leverage Apache Flink primarily for real-time data processing in sectors such as retail, transportation, and telecommunications. By deploying on AWS with Kubernetes, companies can utilize it for data cleaning, generating customer insights, and providing swift real-time updates. It effectively manages millions of events per second, serving use cases like cab aggregations, map-making, and outlier detection in telecom networks, enabling seamless integration of streaming data with existing pipelines.

Apache

Confluent offers scalable, open-source flexibility and seamless data replication, supported by strong cloud integration. Key features like Kafka Connect and real-time processing make it valuable for data streaming projects while ensuring high availability with a Multi-Region Cluster.

Confluent is a robust data streaming platform that enables efficient management and integration of real-time data pipelines. Its message-driven architecture and fault tolerance provide reliability, while a user-friendly dashboard and connectors support diverse data sources. Cloud integration reduces costs, and extensive documentation, plugins, and monitoring capabilities enhance collaboration and revision management. Despite some areas needing improvement, including security in the SaaS version and integration flexibility, Confluent remains a staple in industries requiring vast data processing and task automation.

What are Confluent's key features?

Scalability: Handles large volumes of data, ensuring continuous performance.
Kafka Connect: Enables seamless data integration across multiple systems.
Real-time Processing: Facilitates instant data insights for rapid decision-making.
Multi-Region Cluster: Maintains data availability across different geographical locations.
Cloud Integration: Reduces operational costs and enhances deployment flexibility.
User Dashboard: Simplifies management with an intuitive interface.

What benefits and ROI should users consider in reviews?

Cost-Efficiency: Improved processes reduce operational expenses.
Data Reliability: Ensures consistent and accurate data handling.
Increased Collaboration: Boosts team efficiency with comprehensive documentation and management tools.
Scalability: Supports business growth without compromising performance.
Integration Flexibility: Seamlessly connects with diverse data sources and systems.

Confluent is commonly implemented in finance, insurance, and software industries for applications like fraud detection, ETL tasks, and enterprise communication. It supports real-time data processing, project management, and task automation, often integrating with project management tools like Jira, providing valuable solutions for business processes.

Sample Customers

LogRhythm, Inc., Inter-American Development Bank, Scientific Technologies Corporation, LotLinx, Inc., Benevity, Inc.

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost