No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Apache Kafka vs Apache Pulsar comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Kafka
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Apache Pulsar
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
20th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Apache Kafka is 3.6%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Apache Pulsar is 2.9%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache Kafka3.6%
Apache Pulsar2.9%
Other93.5%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Amandeep Pawar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at Airy Software Technologies Private Limited
Event-driven architecture has improved asynchronous communication and supports high throughput
We can improve the high throughput because there are some limitations. We could add something to improve Apache Kafka. Based on my daily usage and analysis, there is a complex setup and management, which is one area requiring improvement. Apache Kafka does not have built-in message delay or scheduling capabilities. Apache Kafka cannot natively schedule messages. Limited message prioritization is also an area requiring improvement. Ordering is limited to a single partition. Large messages affect performance. Apache Kafka is optimized for many small to medium-sized messages, but large payloads increase network usage, increase disk usage, and slow down producers and consumers. I rate Apache Kafka eight out of ten instead of ten out of ten because operating an Apache Kafka cluster requires expertise in partitioning, application monitoring, and capacity planning. Self-managed deployment can become complex as the cluster grows. Pro-managed Apache Kafka services significantly reduce the operational overhead.
it_user1087029 - PeerSpot reviewer
Solution Architect at Vlaanderen connect.
The solution can mimic other APIs without changing a line of code
The solution operates as a classic message broker but also as a streaming platform. It operates differently than a traditional streaming platform with storage and computing handled separately. It scales easier and better than Kafka which can be stubborn. You can even make it act like Kafka because it understands Kafka APIs. There are even companies that will sell you Kafka but underneath it is Apache Pulsar. The solution is very compatible because it can mimic other APIs without changing a line of code.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"With Kafka, events and streaming are persistent, and multiple subscribers can consume the data. This is an advantage of Kafka compared to simple queue-based solutions."
"The ability to partition data on Kafka is valuable."
"Kafka is scalable. It can manage a high volume of data from many sources."
"Apache Kafka offers unique data streaming."
"Deployment is speedy."
"The solution is very scalable. We started with a cluster of three and then scaled it to seven."
"It seemed pretty stable and didn't have any issues at all."
"I like the performance and reliability of Kafka, as I needed a data streaming buffer that could handle thousands of messages per second with at least one processing point for an analytics pipeline, and Kafka fits this requirement very well, as it is a fast, distributed message broker that does exactly what it is designed to do."
"The solution operates as a classic message broker but also as a streaming platform."
 

Cons

"I would like to see monitoring service tools."
"This product guarantees at-least-once delivery."
"The GUI tools for monitoring and support are still very basic and not very rich. There is no help in determining a shard key for performance."
"In Apache Kafka, it is currently difficult to create a consumer."
"The speed isn't as fast as RabbitMQ, even though the solution touts itself as very quick."
"Something that could be improved is having an interface to monitor the consuming rate."
"Prioritization of messages in Apache Kafka could improve."
"The manageability should be improved. There are lots of things we need to manage and it should have a function that enables us to manage them all cohesively."
"Documentation is poor because much of it is in Chinese with no English translation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price for the enterprise version is quite high. For on-premise, there is an annual fee, which starts at 60,000 euros, but it is usually higher than 100,000 euros. The cost for a project including the subscription is usually between 100,000 to 200,000 euros. The cost also depends on the level of support. There are two different levels of support."
"When starting to look at a distributed message system, look for a cloud solution first. It is an easier entry point than an on-premises hardware solution."
"Apache Kafka is an open-source solution and there are no fees, but there are fees associated with confluence, which are based on subscription."
"Running a Kafka cluster can be expensive, especially if you need to scale it up to handle large amounts of data."
"Apache Kafka is an open-source solution."
"Apache Kafka has an open-source pricing."
"Apache Kafka is an open-source solution."
"I would not subscribe to the Confluent platform, but rather stay on the free open source version. The extra cost wasn't justified."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise51
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What are the differences between Apache Kafka and IBM MQ?
Apache Kafka is open source and can be used for free. It has very good log management and has a way to store the data used for analytics. Apache Kafka is very good if you have a high number of user...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Kafka?
Based on my understanding for the setup and cost to set up Apache Kafka, I was not responsible for the pricing or licensing decisions. Apache Kafka itself is open source and free to use. Infrastruc...
What needs improvement with Apache Kafka?
We can improve the high throughput because there are some limitations. We could add something to improve Apache Kafka. Based on my daily usage and analysis, there is a complex setup and management,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Uber, Netflix, Activision, Spotify, Slack, Pinterest
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Databricks, Microsoft, Apache and others in Streaming Analytics. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.