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

Boomi iPaaS vs Confluent 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

Boomi iPaaS
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (4th)
Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Boomi iPaaS and Confluent aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Boomi iPaaS is designed for Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) and holds a mindshare of 11.0%, up 7.5% compared to last year.
Confluent, on the other hand, focuses on Streaming Analytics, holds 8.3% mindshare, down 10.6% since last year.
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Eugene Paden - PeerSpot reviewer
Integration solution proves maturity and drives productivity
There are many features we're using. We're starting to do AI now regarding integration with other platforms, focusing on creating integrations. A significant area for improvement is version control. Currently, you develop and cannot properly roll back to a previous version unless you create different versions. With proper version control, you could know which version to revert to and test other versions.
Gustavo-Barbosa Dos Santos - PeerSpot reviewer
Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming
Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance. It helps us understand the various requirements of multiple customers and validates the information for different versions. We can automate the tasks using Confluent Kafka. Thus, it guarantees us the data quality and maintains the integrity of message contracts.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The Salesforce and NetSuite Application specific “connectors” provide a layer of abstraction on top of the SOAP-based APIs to streamline integration development."
"The best features are that it is a cloud-based and a multi-tenant tool."
"This solution has a user-friendly interface and very good documentation with solutions that helped us in working with the tool efficiently."
"The maturity of the product is significant."
"This is a fairly easy-to-use tool for integration which can be self-taught for those with a bit of a technical background."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring part to debug certain issues and find problems."
"The solution has a lot of connectors, which is quite helpful."
"The platform is user-friendly."
"Confluent facilitates the messaging tasks with Kafka, streamlining our processes effectively."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"We ensure seamless management of Kafka through Confluent, allowing all of our Kafka activities to be handled by a third party."
"I would rate the scalability of the solution at eight out of ten. We have 20 people who use Confluent in our organization now, and we hope to increase usage in the future."
"With Confluent Cloud we no longer need to handle the infrastructure and the plumbing, which is a concern for Confluent. The other advantage is that all portfolios have access to the data that is being shared."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"A person with a good IT background and HTML will not have any trouble with Confluent."
"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"They need to introduce more configurable functions to remove scripting or coding. Scripting should be minimized. It should have exhaustive functions. Currently, it lacks in this aspect."
"Boomi AtomSphere Integration should scale up on the migration area."
"Although Boomi iPaaS is top in the market, there might be room for improvement in the ETL aspect, which was recently integrated as another module. This aspect of Boomi iPaaS is not mature enough at the moment."
"Boomi iPaaS needs better source control. It is not as good as it could be in terms of managing versions and running what-if scenarios."
"They should create a custom connector option. With this, they could improve where the user can create the connector, based on their usage."
"We encountered stability issues occasionally, one to two times a year."
"The solution is complex. There's a few items and features that are hard to understand. They should work to simplify the functionality so new users don't struggle."
"There are more mature (dedicated) API management and master data management (MDM) solutions available in the market."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"It would help if the knowledge based documents in the support portal could be available for public use as well."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"It could have more themes. They should also have more reporting-oriented plugins as well. It would be great to have free custom reports that can be dispatched directly from Jira."
"One area we've identified that could be improved is the governance and access control to the Kafka topics. We've found some limitations, like a threshold of 10,000 rules per cluster, that make it challenging to manage access at scale if we have many different data sources."
"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing model of Dell Boomi is based on a ‘pay-per-use’ model."
"AtomSphere Integration's pricing is competitive, and I would rate it seven out of ten."
"It is an expensive platform."
"Approximately 20k annually."
"This solution is very economical (based on the connections)."
"The pricing is not reasonable at all. It's very high."
"They do not charge by the number of people using the software (client-server model), but rather they charge based on the number of connections used. This makes it very cost effective."
"The cost of the solution is in the neighborhood of $20,000 annually. There are no costs above the standard licensing fee."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"The pricing model of Confluent could improve because if you have a classic use case where you're going to use all the features there is no plan to reduce the features. You should be able to pick and choose basic services at a reduced price. The pricing was high for our needs. We should not have to pay for features we do not use."
"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."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"It comes with a high cost."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
860,632 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Non Profit
5%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Insurance Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Boomi AtomSphere Integration?
The tool's most valuable features I've found are related to debugging and testing. It makes it easy to track execution, documents, and process history. This functionality is particularly useful for...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Boomi AtomSphere Integration?
The pricing for Boomi iPaaS is reasonable, costing around $6,000 per year. It is affordable even for small customers, like a salon with a couple of branches.
What needs improvement with Boomi AtomSphere Integration?
Boomi iPaaS needs better source control. It is not as good as it could be in terms of managing versions and running what-if scenarios.
What do you like most about Confluent?
I find Confluent's Kafka Connectors and Kafka Streams invaluable for my use cases because they simplify real-time data processing and ETL tasks by providing reliable, pre-packaged connectors and to...
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?
I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team. The lack of easy access to the Confluent support team is also a...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Boomi
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DocuSign Inc., Innotas, Certent, Renesas Electronics America (REA), Kelly-Moore Paints, Mindjet, City of McKinney, Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers (RBA), Daylight Transport, A10 Networks
ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Salesforce, SAP and others in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS). Updated: June 2025.
860,632 professionals have used our research since 2012.