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

Confluent vs Google Cloud Dataflow comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

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

Confluent
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Google Cloud Dataflow
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Confluent is 6.6%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Google Cloud Dataflow is 3.5%, down from 6.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Confluent6.6%
Google Cloud Dataflow3.5%
Other89.9%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

PavanManepalli - PeerSpot reviewer
AVP - Sr Middleware Messaging Integration Engineer at Wells Fargo
Has supported streaming use cases across data centers and simplifies fraud analytics with SQL-based processing
I recommend that Confluent should improve its solution to keep up with competitors in the market, such as Solace and other upcoming tools such as NATS. Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools. They need to improve in that direction by not only reducing costs but also providing better solutions for the problems customers face to avoid frustrations, whether through future enhancement requests or ensuring product stability. The cost should be worked on, and they should provide better solutions for customers. Solutions should focus on hierarchical topics; if a customer has different types of data and sources, they should be able to send them to the same place for analytics. Currently, Confluent requires everything to send to the same topic, which becomes very large and makes running analytics difficult. The hierarchy of topics should be improved. This part is available in MQ and other products such as Solace, but it is missing in Confluent, leading many in capital markets and trading to switch to Solace. In terms of stability, it is not the stability itself that needs improvement but rather the delivery semantics. Other products offer exactly-once delivery out of the box, whereas Confluent states it will offer this but lacks the knobs or levers for tuning configurations effectively. Confluent has hundreds of configurations that application teams must understand, which creates a gap. Users are often unaware of what values to set for better performance or to achieve exactly-once semantics, making it difficult to navigate through them. Delivery semantics also need to be worked on.
reviewer2812851 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Customer Data Platform Specialist at a marketing services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Unified user personas have improved data workflows and support detailed monitoring and logging
Google Cloud has many streams and products. In Google Cloud, everything is translated in the backend, so we do not have to use services such as Apache Beam. When you want to use Google Cloud Functions, you write the code, and the backend talks to all the libraries or Apache, so we do not need to be concerned about those. We just need to use our functions that translate and have many tools and services readily available. Google Cloud Dataflow has made it very easy for detailed monitoring and logging features for pipeline performance assessment. For example, if I am using Google Cloud Functions, I can easily see what changes I have done and trace it properly. I can see what is happening with this script, how many users are affected, whether the script is working, what is failing, and how we can rectify issues with proper monitoring.

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 feature that we are using is the data replication between the data centers allowing us to configure a disaster recovery or software. However, is it's not mandatory to use and because most of the features that we use are from Apache Kafka, such as end-to-end encryption. Internally, we can develop our own kind of product or service from Apache Kafka."
"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 tools."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"The biggest benefit of Confluent as a tool is that it is a distributed platform that provides more durability and stability."
"As an enterprise organization, data availability is critical and Confluent provides that SLA support."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"To date, we have seen improvements in performance and scalability, so we recommend this solution."
"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."
"Google's support team is good at resolving issues, especially with large data."
"Google Cloud Dataflow is useful for streaming and data pipelines."
"Migrating our batch processing jobs to Google Cloud Dataflow led to a reduction in cost by 70%."
"The service is relatively cheap compared to other batch-processing engines."
"The best feature of Google Cloud Dataflow is its practical connectedness."
"Google Cloud Dataflow has made it very easy for detailed monitoring and logging features for pipeline performance assessment."
"The most valuable features of Google Cloud Dataflow are the integration, it's very simple if you have the complete stack, which we are using. It is overall very easy to use, user-friendly friendly, and cost-effective if you know how to use it. The solution is very flexible for programmers, if you know how to do scripts or program in Python or any other language, it's extremely easy to use."
"The integration within Google Cloud Platform is very good."
 

Cons

"Currently, in the early stages, I see a gap on the security side. If you are using the SaaS version, we would like to get a fuller, more secure solution that can be adopted right out of the box. Confluence could do a better job sharing best practices or a reusable pattern that others have used, especially for companies that can not afford to hire professional services from Confluent."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"The product should integrate tools for incorporating diagrams like Lucidchart. It also needs to improve its formatting features. We also faced issues while granting permissions."
"Confluent has fallen behind in being the tool of the industry. It's taking second place to things such as Word and SharePoint and other office tools that are more dynamic and flexible than Confluent."
"Confluent has a good monitoring tool, but it's not customizable."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"The pricing was high for our needs. We should not have to pay for features we do not use."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"I would like Google Cloud Dataflow to be integrated with IT data flow and other related services to make it easier to use as it is a complex tool."
"Currently, not all error logs are available to users and this could make debugging failed jobs very difficult."
"The solution's setup process could be more accessible."
"They should do a market survey and then make improvements."
"There are certain challenges regarding the Google Cloud Composer which can be improved."
"Promoting the technology more broadly would help increase its adoption."
"The system could function in an automated fashion and provide suggestions based on past transactions to achieve better scalability."
"The authentication part of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Confluent is highly priced."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is low pricing and ten is high pricing, I would rate Confluent's pricing at five. I have not encountered any additional costs."
"Confluence's pricing is quite reasonable, with a cost of around $10 per user that decreases as the number of users increases. Additionally, it's worth noting that for teams of up to 10 users, the solution is completely free."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."
"The price of the solution depends on many factors, such as how they pay for tools in the company and its size."
"Google Cloud Dataflow is a cheap solution."
"Google Cloud is slightly cheaper than AWS."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate Google Cloud Dataflow's pricing a four out of ten."
"The solution is cost-effective."
"The tool is cheap."
"The solution is not very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Retailer
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Retailer
8%
Computer Software Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise12
 

Questions from the Community

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 recommend that Confluent should improve its solution to keep up with competitors in the market, such as Solace and other upcoming tools such as NATS. Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about ...
What is your primary use case for Confluent?
The main use cases for Confluent are log aggregation and streaming. I'm familiar with Confluent stream processing with KSQL. KSQL helps in terms of data analytics strategies because if we are the d...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Google Cloud Dataflow?
Pricing is normal. It is part of a package received from Google, and they are not charging us too high.
What needs improvement with Google Cloud Dataflow?
I feel there could be something that they can introduce, such as when we have data in the tables, a feature that creates a unique persona of the user automatically, so we do not have to do that man...
What is your primary use case for Google Cloud Dataflow?
The primary use case for Google Cloud Dataflow is when a brand has a lot of data and wants to store it in their warehouse. They can use BigQuery to store their data or use big data solutions to sto...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Google Dataflow
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Absolutdata, Backflip Studios, Bluecore, Claritics, Crystalloids, Energyworx, GenieConnect, Leanplum, Nomanini, Redbus, Streak, TabTale
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. Google Cloud Dataflow and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,644 professionals have used our research since 2012.