Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apache Kafka vs SAS Event Stream Processing comparison

 

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
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SAS Event Stream Processing
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
28th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Apache Kafka is 3.7%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SAS Event Stream Processing is 0.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Apache Kafka3.7%
SAS Event Stream Processing0.6%
Other95.7%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Snehasish Das - PeerSpot reviewer
Data streaming transforms real-time data movement with impressive scalability
I worked with Apache Kafka for customers in the financial industry and OTT platforms. They use Kafka particularly for data streaming. Companies offering movie and entertainment as a service, similar to Netflix, use Kafka Apache Kafka offers unique data streaming. It allows the use of data in…
Roi Jason Buela - PeerSpot reviewer
A solution with useful windowing features and great for operations and marketing
The persistence could be better. Although ESP is designed for in-memory processing, it would be better if the solution is enhanced or improved on the persistence of the data that is kept in the memory. For example, if one server goes down and the information is stored in the memory, it is lost. Therefore, the persistence needs to be improved so that if there are more cases where the server is down, the information and data can still be intact.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features of the solution revolve around areas like the latency part, where the tool offers very little latency and the sequencing part."
"The most valuable feature of Apache Kafka is the clustering which is very easy to scale and we have multiple servers all over our platforms. It has been useful for stability and performance."
"The stream processing is a very valuable aspect of the solution for us."
"It seemed pretty stable and didn't have any issues at all."
"I have seen a return on investment with this solution."
"A great streaming platform."
"Deployment is speedy."
"We get amazing throughput. We don't get any delay."
"The solution is beneficial on an enterprise level."
 

Cons

"Data pulling and restart ability need improving."
"Some vendors don't offer extra features for monitoring."
"We haven't seen a return on investment with Apache Kafka. It's used for a specific use case rather than cost reduction."
"There have been some challenges with monitoring Apache Kafka, as there are currently only a few production-grade solutions available, which are all under enterprise license and therefore not easily accessible. The speaker has not had access to any of these solutions and has instead relied on tools, such as Dynatrace, which do not provide sufficient insight into the Apache Kafka system. While there are other tools available, they do not offer the same level of real-time data as enterprise solutions."
"In Apache Kafka, it is currently difficult to create a consumer."
"They need to have a proper portal to do everything because, at this moment, Kafka is lagging in this regard."
"The solution can improve its cloud support."
"The repository isn't working very well. It's not user friendly."
"The persistence could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing issues are not applicable. Apache licensing makes it simple with almost zero cost for the software itself."
"I rate Apache Kafka's pricing a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. There are no additional costs apart from the licensing fees for Apache Kafka."
"Running a Kafka cluster can be expensive, especially if you need to scale it up to handle large amounts of data."
"The solution is open source."
"Kafka is an open-source solution, so there are no licensing costs."
"The price of Apache Kafka is good."
"Apache Kafka is free."
"Apache Kafka has an open-source pricing."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
869,785 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise47
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 do you like most about Apache Kafka?
Apache Kafka is an open-source solution that can be used for messaging or event processing.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Kafka?
Its pricing is reasonable. It's not always about cost, but about meeting specific needs.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Uber, Netflix, Activision, Spotify, Slack, Pinterest
Honda, HSBC, Lufthansa, Nestle, 89Degrees.
Find out what your peers are saying about Databricks, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Confluent and others in Streaming Analytics. Updated: September 2025.
869,785 professionals have used our research since 2012.