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

Apache Kafka vs SAS Event Stream Processing 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
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SAS Event Stream Processing
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
29th
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 November 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Apache Kafka is 3.5%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SAS Event Stream Processing is 1.1%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache Kafka3.5%
SAS Event Stream Processing1.1%
Other95.4%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Amandeep Pawar - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineer Technology at Iris 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.
Roi Jason Buela - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Technical Consultant at Thakral One
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

"Its availability is brilliant."
"All the features of Apache Kafka are valuable, I cannot single out one feature."
"Apache Kafka is a good solution with many good features but for large deployments, I would choose IBM MQ over Kafka."
"Deployment is speedy."
"We implemented the notification system between our components, and we found that Apache Kafka performs well in scalability, improving our organization because of the scalability and the comfort of a fail-safe or disaster recovery it provides."
"The high availability is valuable. It is robust, and we can rely on it for a huge amount of data."
"The solution has allowed us to take the use cases provided by another communication tool and resolve those issues."
"Apache Kafka has helped out the organization because we leverage it for all our eCommerce real-time analytics use cases."
"The solution is beneficial on an enterprise level."
 

Cons

"The support from Apache Kafka could improve. Their engineers at times do not know what the solutions can do."
"Too much dependency on the zookeeper and leader selection is still the bottleneck for Kafka implementation."
"While the solution scales well and easily, you need to understand your future needs and prep for the peaks."
"There is a lot of information available for the solution and it can be overwhelming to sort through."
"More Windows support, I believe, is one area where it can improve. We need to wrap it as a service, but there isn't one built into Windows."
"When we have thousands of topics, it is hard to visualize."
"Confluent has improved aspects like documentation and cloud support, yet Kafka's reliance on older architectures like ZooKeeper in previous versions is a limitation."
"Something that could be improved is having an interface to monitor the consuming rate."
"The persistence could be better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is approximately $600,000 USD."
"The cost can vary depending on the provider and the specific flavor or version you use. I'm not very knowledgeable about the pricing details."
"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."
"Kafka is more reasonably priced than IBM MQ."
"The price of Apache Kafka is good."
"Apache Kafka is an open-sourced solution. There are fees if you want the support, and I would recommend it for enterprises. There are annual subscriptions available."
"The solution is open source; it's free to use."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
No data available
 

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
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Uber, Netflix, Activision, Spotify, Slack, Pinterest
Honda, HSBC, Lufthansa, Nestle, 89Degrees.
Find out what your peers are saying about Databricks, Microsoft, Apache and others in Streaming Analytics. Updated: October 2026.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.