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

Apache Kafka vs TIBCO Streaming comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 30, 2025

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
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
TIBCO Streaming
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Complex Event Processing (CEP) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Apache Kafka is 3.8%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO Streaming is 1.1%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Apache Kafka3.8%
TIBCO Streaming1.1%
Other95.1%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Bruno da Silva - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager at Timestamp, SA
Have worked closely with the team to deploy streaming and transaction pipelines in a flexible cloud environment
The interface of Apache Kafka could be significantly better. I started working with Apache Kafka from its early days, and I have seen many improvements. The back office functionality could be enhanced. Scaling up continues to be a challenge, though it is much easier now than it was in the beginning.
MK
Head of Data and Analytics Solutions at a tech vendor with 201-500 employees
Good stability and scalability with the capability to combine with Spotfire
The ability for StreamBase to combine with Spotfire is its most valuable aspect. The ability to handle data in motion and the entirety of data at the same time is very good. If you don't integrate the two together it's just a monitoring tool, but if they're combined together it becomes a powerful analytical tool. When you can combine live data from streaming data sources with standing data from the customer's primary database then you can calculate some KPIs or thresholds based on the previous information. We can do data science, machine learning methods or just clever queries. You can view all this online. If a KPI hits a redline, you can send alerts, which is the solution's most functional feature.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is very scalable. We started with a cluster of three and then scaled it to seven."
"It is easy to configure."
"Scalability is very good."
"I use it for real-time processing workloads. So, in some instances, it's like IoT data. We need to put it into a data lake."
"The most valuable features are the stream API, consumer groups, and the way that the scaling takes place."
"Apache Kafka is particularly valuable for stream data processing, handling transactions, managing high levels of transactions, and orchestrating stream mode data."
"Deployment is speedy."
"The most valuable feature is the documentation, which is good and clear."
"The ability for StreamBase to combine with Spotfire is its most valuable aspect. The ability to handle data in motion and the entirety of data at the same time is very good. If you don't integrate the two together it's just a monitoring tool, but if they're combined together it becomes a powerful analytical tool."
 

Cons

"There is a lot of information available for the solution and it can be overwhelming to sort through."
"The solution should be easier to manage. It needs to improve its visualization feature in the next release."
"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."
"Something that could be improved is having an interface to monitor the consuming rate."
"Kafka requires non-trivial expertise with DevOps to deploy in production at scale. The organization needs to understand ZooKeeper and Kafka and should consider using additional tools, such as MirrorMaker, so that the organization can survive an availability zone or a region going down."
"The product is good, but it needs implementation and on-going support. The whole cloud engagement model has made the adoption of Kafka better due to PaaS (Amazon Kinesis, a fully managed service by AWS)."
"Kafka's interface could also use some work. Some of our products are in C, and we don't have any libraries to use with C. From an interface perspective, we had a library from the readies. And we are streaming some of the products we built to readies. That is one of the requirements. It would be good to have those libraries available in a future release for our C++ clients or public libraries, so we can include them in our product and build on that."
"The interface has room for improvement, and there is a steep learning curve for Hadoop integration. It was a struggle learning to send from Hadoop to Kafka. In future releases, I'd like to see improvements in ETL functionality and Hadoop integration."
"The solution should be more user-friendly for developers. Right now, you need a strong programmer to tune the solution. It's complicated product. I'm not sure if it can be done via self-service with BI. Because I'm from BI, I want more simplicity."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's a bit cheaper compared to other Q applications."
"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."
"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."
"The price of the solution is low."
"Kafka is an open-source solution, so there are no licensing costs."
"Apache Kafka is an open-source solution."
"Apache Kafka has an open-source pricing."
"It is approximately $600,000 USD."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise49
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
 

Also Known As

No data available
TIBCO Streambase CEP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Uber, Netflix, Activision, Spotify, Slack, Pinterest
Blendtec, Brembo, CargoSmart, Hunt Oil, Autodata, Bank of Montreal
Find out what your peers are saying about Databricks, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft and others in Streaming Analytics. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.