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

Confluent vs Striim 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

Confluent
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
9th
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
20th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (44th), Cloud Data Integration (23rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Confluent is 6.2%, down from 8.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Striim is 1.8%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Confluent6.2%
Striim1.8%
Other92.0%
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

"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."
"To date, we have seen improvements in performance and scalability, so we recommend this solution."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"Having used SharePoint in the past, when I compare with traditional, old document repositories, like SharePoint, I would definitely recommend Confluent."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"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."
"Striim is definitely my data migration tool and data reflection syncing tool. It reduces manual intervention because it automatically syncs the data from the warehouse."
"Striim acts as the perfect modern bridge for legacy environments, keeping both our development teams and business stakeholders happy."
"Striim's intuitive UI for monitoring, the flow designer, and the real-time console are straightforward and helpful."
"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."
 

Cons

"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"The pricing was high for our needs. We should not have to pay for features we do not use."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"It could be more user-friendly and centralized. A way to reduce redundancy would be helpful."
"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."
"The beginner who doesn't know how to work on HTML will struggle as when you create spaces in the Confluent, if you want to have some meeting notes or anything else, you need to know HTML and which HTML tags to include."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"Striim can be improved by providing tools such as short videos or step-by-step manuals to clearly demonstrate its capabilities and help users learn quickly."
"I think Striim could be improved with better pricing and enhanced documentation."
"I would say Striim performance needs improvement because we use more GoldenGate, so I tend to compare GoldenGate with Striim."
"I think the initial schema mapping tool in Striim can have a learning curve when dealing with deeply nested mainframe structures or complex copybooks."
"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 highly priced."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"It comes with a high cost."
"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."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Retailer
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Construction Company
6%
Retailer
16%
Construction Company
12%
Healthcare Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

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?
It's very fair. We had a private cloud, and it's not based on the number of events. It was based on the number of cores and CPU cores.
What needs improvement with Striim?
I think the initial schema mapping tool in Striim can have a learning curve when dealing with deeply nested mainframe structures or complex copybooks. A more automated, BA-friendly interface for ma...
What is your primary use case for Striim?
Our main use case for Striim is real-time data integration and change data capture, which we used to pull live transaction logs directly from IBM DB2 and stream them seamlessly into our modern clou...
 

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 Confluent vs. Striim and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.