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

CloudQuery vs Confluent comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

CloudQuery
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Data Integration (22nd)
Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (9th)
 

Featured Reviews

Henry Ngeno - PeerSpot reviewer
Operations Manager at a security firm with 10,001+ employees
Centralized visibility has transformed how my teams manage risk, compliance, and cloud resources
CloudQuery can be improved in several areas, particularly regarding the technical expertise required. It is not a platform suitable for layman staff or those lacking proficiency; it demands knowledge in data integration, cloud infrastructure, and SQL. Organizations without the necessary technical capabilities may struggle to utilize the platform effectively. Moreover, this complexity can increase the IT budget due to subscription costs, hosting, and additional maintenance expenses that can accumulate. Another area requiring improvement is the reliability of output, which currently depends heavily on data quality and access permissions. If the data in my cloud infrastructure lacks quality, the information curated will also be inaccurate, creating gaps and undetected issues. Therefore, the platform's reliability and accuracy hinge on maintaining high-quality data stored in the cloud.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"CloudQuery connects well with the role of cloud infrastructure management, providing rapid and impactful changes without delays in execution, ensuring everything related to database and data management functions effectively."
"CloudQuery has positively impacted my organization because instead of navigating through multiple cloud consoles, I can run an SQL query and get, for example, all my S3 buckets that are public, private, or that I need to do something with."
"The AI-generated SQL works well for my team as it gets things right most of the time."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"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."
"We primarily use Confluent for service desk and task management, and it is also good for knowledge base management."
"The most valuable feature of Confluent is the wide range of features provided. They're leading the market in this category."
"The features I find most useful in Confluent are the Multi-Region Cluster, MRC, and the Cluster Linking for replication."
 

Cons

"CloudQuery can be improved in several areas, particularly regarding the technical expertise required."
"CloudQuery really acts as an asset inventory tool, which is great, but I find that somewhat limiting."
"The solution could have an extra plugin or upgrading feature. In addition, it could have more integration with different platforms and be more compatible."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"Confluent has a good monitoring tool, but it's not customizable."
"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."
"From the control center perspective, there is a lot of room for improvement in the visualization."
"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"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 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."
"It comes with a high cost."
"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."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
14%
Retailer
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise17
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with CloudQuery?
CloudQuery could maybe integrate with some AI agents like ChatGPT or Claude to help us do some things like writing in natural language instead of SQL. Regarding CloudQuery's AI capabilities, I thin...
What is your primary use case for CloudQuery?
My main use case for CloudQuery is as a tool for inventory platforms that lets me extract, transform, and query infrastructure data using SQL. A quick specific example of how I use CloudQuery in my...
What advice do you have for others considering CloudQuery?
My advice to others looking into using CloudQuery is that if you like SQL, you can use this product as if it was MySQL, SQL Server, or any other relational database. I would rate this product a 10 ...
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...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Informatica, Palantir and others in Cloud Data Integration. Updated: September 2026.
917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.