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

Confluent vs Palantir Foundry 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

Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (5th)
Palantir Foundry
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (12th), IT Operations Analytics (10th), Supply Chain Analytics (1st), Cloud Data Integration (11th), Data Migration Appliances (3rd), Data Management Platforms (DMP) (1st), Data and Analytics Service Providers (1st)
 

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.
BA
Associate Vice President at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Unified data workflows have empowered collaborative analytics and streamlined AI development
Regarding points for improvement for Palantir Foundry, I see that they are improving day by day. In the last one to two years, I have seen many improvements compared to the two years that I have worked on Palantir Foundry. There are many things that come up, but a few things are not intuitive enough. Now that we are in this AI phase, Palantir Foundry has created some wrappers around the models, allowing us to create using a no-code application, chatbots, and LLM functions. The problem is that interaction with outside applications can be difficult with the current setup that Palantir Foundry has. There are ways to do that, but it is not that intuitive, which is what I feel.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"The benefit is escaping email communication. Sometimes people ignore emails or put them into spam, but with Confluence, everyone sees the same text at the same time."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"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."
"Some of the best features are that it's very quick to set up, very easy to have a centralized area that gives us a history of changes, and the ability to give feedback on any information placed onto the pages."
"The ease of use is my favorite feature. We're able to build different models and projects or combine different projects to build one use case."
"The solution provides an end-to-end integrated tech stack that takes care of all utility/infrastructure topics for you."
"The security is also excellent. It's highly granular, so the admins have a high degree of control, and there are many levels of security. That worked well. You won't have an EDC unless you put everything onto the platform because it is its own isolated thing."
"Palantir Foundry is a robust platform that has really strong plugin connectors and provides features for real-time integration."
"I rate Palantir Foundry a ten out of ten."
"The solution offers very good end-to-end capabilities."
"The virtualization tool is useful."
"The data lineage is great."
 

Cons

"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."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"It would help if the knowledge based documents in the support portal could be available for public use as well."
"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
"Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools."
"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."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"The workflow could be improved."
"Difficult to receive data from external sources."
"The solution’s data security could be improved."
"The problem is that interaction with outside applications can be difficult with the current setup that Palantir Foundry has."
"The solution's visualization and analysis could be improved."
"They do not have a data center in Europe, and we have lots of personally identifiable information in our dataset that needs to be hosted by a third-party data center like Amazon or Microsoft Azure."
"Cost of this solution is quite high."
"The startup pricing is high, causing concern despite being cost-effective in terms of total cost of ownership."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Confluent is highly priced."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"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."
"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."
"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’s pricing is high."
"It's expensive."
"Palantir Foundry is an expensive solution."
"Palantir Foundry has different pricing models that can be negotiated."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
11%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
8%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise9
 

Questions from the Community

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 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 needs improvement with Palantir Foundry?
Apart from the pricing and offline availability issues, improvements are needed in Palantir Foundry's costing factor. Cost-wise, it is not open for everybody, and they are not exposing anything out...
What is your primary use case for Palantir Foundry?
One of the leading European manufacturing plants uses Palantir Foundry for manufacturing interior parts of various car brands such as Honda, Hyundai, Ford, Mercedes-Benz, and BMW. This involves hig...
What advice do you have for others considering Palantir Foundry?
Palantir Foundry is an excellent product for data engineering. On a scale of one to 10, I would rate Palantir Foundry a 9.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Merck KGaA, Airbus, Ferrari,United States Intelligence Community, United States Department of Defense
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. Palantir Foundry and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.