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

Google Cloud Memorystore vs Hazelcast Platform 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

Google Cloud Memorystore
Ranking in In-Memory Data Store Services
3rd
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Hazelcast Platform
Ranking in In-Memory Data Store Services
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the In-Memory Data Store Services category, the mindshare of Google Cloud Memorystore is 13.5%, down from 23.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Hazelcast Platform is 10.6%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
In-Memory Data Store Services Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Google Cloud Memorystore13.5%
Hazelcast Platform10.6%
Other75.9%
In-Memory Data Store Services
 

Featured Reviews

Use Google Cloud Memorystore?
Leave a review
PM
Director of Engineering at Visa
Distributed caching has reduced latency and now supports real-time stream processing
I think there are areas where Hazelcast Platform can improve, such as simplifying the cluster topology and sizing rules because they are still somewhat complex for someone new to Hazelcast. Understanding how the cluster topology forms and sizing rules work, such as partition balancing and traffic routing, should be much simpler. If one node has less RAM or a slightly slower CPU, it creates a cluster-wide performance bottleneck, which is critical, especially with transactional systems. Even though Hazelcast Platform has proven to be better, there can still be bottlenecks if the cluster topology and data partitioning are not easily understood. I also think that object handling and streamlined serialization should be prioritized; using standard Java serialization can be extremely slow. Providing native ultra-fast binary serialization out of the box, without requiring developers to write custom adapters, would be a significant improvement. It would be great if there were ready-to-use adapters for streamlined serialization and object handling.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which In-Memory Data Store Services solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Also Known As

Memorystore
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Paypal, Target, The Home Depot
British Gas, Airbus Defense, Ellie Mae, Gamesys
Find out what your peers are saying about Redis, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Google and others in In-Memory Data Store Services. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.