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

Confluent vs Striim 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
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Striim
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (47th), Cloud Data Integration (27th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Confluent is 6.4%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Striim is 1.7%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Confluent6.4%
Striim1.7%
Other91.9%
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.
RV
Data Engineer
Real-time data capture has accelerated releases and now improves trust in our data warehouse
The checkpoints would help me to figure out where the problem was if there's any lag, but I had to do a lot of manual work to figure out where the lag is. Striim would not intuitively tell me the culprit table or database behind the lag. I believe that is an improvement Striim could definitely do. Passwords were an issue. Property variables were not supported for passwords, meaning I had to make sure the password is manually populated. I believe if Striim could read from AWS secrets or its own secret mechanism to store the password, that would really save a lot of time so that I don't have to keep updating the password whenever there is any change. The user experience of triggering alerts if there's any lag which Striim identified, which is outside normal processing time, could intrinsically be done by Striim. I believe that was lacking. I would wait for Striim to tell me, instead of me going and validating whether Striim is lagging behind. If Striim could itself tell me that it's seeing a lot more volume than expected, that would really make me give it a higher number.

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 of Confluent is the wide range of features provided. They're leading the market in this category."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"We ensure seamless management of Kafka through Confluent, allowing all of our Kafka activities to be handled by a third party."
"Overall, it's a great company and they have excellent software."
"As an enterprise organization, data availability is critical and Confluent provides that SLA support."
"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"Having used SharePoint in the past, when I compare with traditional, old document repositories, like SharePoint, I would definitely recommend Confluent."
"With Confluent Cloud we no longer need to handle the infrastructure and the plumbing, which is a concern for Confluent, and the other advantage is that all portfolios have access to the data that is being shared."
"Striim is capable of absorbing a large number of transactions, and the difference between the two databases is always less than a second, which demonstrates efficiency and highlights the variety of sources and targets I have used."
"We were confidently in a situation to call Snowflake as a single source of truth, and I believe with Striim, we were able to do that because without Striim, the SLA would be much higher, and there would not have been much confidence in Snowflake."
 

Cons

"The solution could have an extra plugin or upgrading feature. In addition, it could have more integration with different platforms and be more compatible."
"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."
"Confluent has a good monitoring tool, but it's not customizable."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"There is a limitation when it comes to seamlessly importing Microsoft documents into Confluent pages, which can be inconvenient for users who frequently work with Microsoft Office tools and need to transition their content to 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 pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"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."
"I think Striim could be improved with better pricing and enhanced documentation."
"The user experience of triggering alerts if there's any lag which Striim identified, which is not normal, could intrinsically be done by Striim."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"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."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Construction Company
17%
Healthcare Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Retailer
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise17
No data available
 

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 Striim?
My experience with the pricing, implementation cost, and licensing of Striim is that it is somewhat expensive.
What needs improvement with Striim?
I think Striim could be improved with better pricing and enhanced documentation.
What is your primary use case for Striim?
I use Striim to perform change data capture from relational databases to non-relational databases in my organization. I implement CDC with Striim by transferring data from Oracle Database to MongoD...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Striim Platform
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Sky, UPS, MACY'S, EMAAR, HSBC
Find out what your peers are saying about Databricks, Microsoft, Apache and others in Streaming Analytics. Updated: July 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.