Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
WSO2 Stream Processor Logo

Top 10 WSO2 Stream Processor Alternatives

Vendor: WSO2
    Leave a review

    Top WSO2 Stream Processor Competitors

    Discover the top alternatives and competitors to WSO2 Stream Processor based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Apache Flink, Apache Pulsar, and Cloudera DataFlow. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.

    WSO2 Stream Processor surpasses its competitors by offering real-time data processing with high scalability, low latency, and advanced analytics capabilities, enabling businesses to optimize performance and make data-driven decisions quickly and efficiently.

    WSO2 Alternatives Report

    Learn what solutions real users are comparing with WSO2, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
    Get the alternatives report
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Apache Flink
    3.9 out of 5
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Apache Flink
    3.9 out of 5
    Apache Flink is ideal for those prioritizing advanced processing performance and community support, while WSO2 Stream Processor appeals to enterprises needing integration and tailored services. In comparison, WSO2 offers comprehensive support with more integrated features, whereas Flink provides cost-efficient scalability.
    Apache Flink's setup cost is free, appealing to budget-conscious users, while WSO2 Stream Processor offers a flexible pricing model, which can vary depending on deployment needs.
    View comparison
    Pricing
    Apache Flink's setup cost is free, appealing to budget-conscious users, while WSO2 Stream Processor offers a flexible pricing model, which can vary depending on deployment needs.
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Apache Pulsar
    4.0 out of 5
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Apache Pulsar
    4.0 out of 5
    WSO2 Stream Processor attracts users through its extensive feature set and seamless integration, fostering robust ecosystems. In comparison, Apache Pulsar appeals with scalability and performance for high data throughput, emphasizing technical deployment benefits and cost-efficiency in large-scale, multi-location environments.
    WSO2 Stream Processor offers a flexible setup with a competitive initial cost, while Apache Pulsar stands out with its scalable setup options at a slightly higher initial cost.
    View comparison
    Pricing
    WSO2 Stream Processor offers a flexible setup with a competitive initial cost, while Apache Pulsar stands out with its scalable setup options at a slightly higher initial cost.
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Cloudera DataFlow
    3.7 out of 5
    WSO2 Stream Processor Logo
    Cloudera DataFlow
    3.7 out of 5
    Cloudera DataFlow's robust data management, appealing with its comprehensive suite, attracts those needing seamless integration with Apache NiFi. In comparison, WSO2 Stream Processor excels in real-time analytics, drawing tech buyers seeking efficient, high-throughput stream processing and competitive pricing.
    Cloudera DataFlow has a higher setup cost than WSO2 Stream Processor, which might appeal more to budget-conscious users.
    View comparison
    Pricing
    Cloudera DataFlow has a higher setup cost than WSO2 Stream Processor, which might appeal more to budget-conscious users.

    Related categories

    Streaming Analytics
    CEP