Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon SQS vs Apache Kafka comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 12, 2025

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

Amazon SQS
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software (3rd)
Apache Kafka
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
86
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Amazon SQS and Apache Kafka aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Amazon SQS is designed for Message Queue (MQ) Software and holds a mindshare of 8.8%, down 11.8% compared to last year.
Apache Kafka, on the other hand, focuses on Streaming Analytics, holds 2.4% mindshare, up 2.0% since last year.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Ariel Tarayants - PeerSpot reviewer
Powerful queue system facilitates seamless asynchronous operations
A feature I would like to see in Amazon SQS is the ability to view the content of messages without removing them from the queue. Enhanced filtering on the messages would be beneficial, as currently one has to pull all messages out, filter the right one by code, and then re-insert the remaining messages. This solution is not effective with the FIFO queue.
Snehasish Das - PeerSpot reviewer
Data streaming transforms real-time data movement with impressive scalability
I worked with Apache Kafka for customers in the financial industry and OTT platforms. They use Kafka particularly for data streaming. Companies offering movie and entertainment as a service, similar to Netflix, use Kafka Apache Kafka offers unique data streaming. It allows the use of data in…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like how we can subscribe to multiple topics in Amazon SQS. It's also much simpler and quicker to set up than other solutions. It also supports patterns like Kafka and RapidMQ's fan-out pattern but with easier implementation."
"It's very quick and easy to build or set up Amazon SQS."
"One of the most valuable features of Amazon SQS is its event-driven invocation."
"Amazon SQS provides faster search through indexing via OpenSearch."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to decouple components."
"SQS is very stable, and it has lots of features."
"I think the tool is very reliable."
"The most valuable features of the solution are AWS Lambda services, ECS, and QuickSight reports, which are beneficial for data analysis."
"There are numerous possibilities that can be explored. While it may be challenging to fully comprehend the potential advantages, one key aspect is the ability to establish a proper sequence of events rather than simply dealing with a jumbled group of occurrences. These events possess their own timestamps, even if they were not initially provided with one, and are arranged in a chronological order that allows for a clear understanding of the progression of the events."
"This is a system for email and other small devices. There has been a relay of transactions continuously over the last two years it has been in production."
"The ability to partition data on Kafka is valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Apache Kafka is Kafka Connect."
"It eases our current data flow and framework."
"The stream processing is a very valuable aspect of the solution for us."
"The most valuable features are the stream API, consumer groups, and the way that the scaling takes place."
"Kafka is scalable. It can manage a high volume of data from many sources."
 

Cons

"I do not think that this solution is easy to use and the documentation of this solution has a lot of problems and can be improved in the next release. Most of the time, the images in the document are from older versions."
"Improvement is needed in terms of troubleshooting and logs."
"The tool needs improvement in user-friendliness and discoverability."
"The solution is not available on-premises so that rules out any customers looking for the messaging solution on-premises."
"Sending or receiving messages takes some time, and it could be quicker."
"As a company that uses IBM solutions, it's difficult to compare Amazon SQS to other solutions. We have been using IBM solutions for a long time and they are very mature in integration and queuing. In my role as an integration manager, I can say that Amazon SQS is designed primarily for use within the Amazon ecosystem and does not have the same level of functionality as IBM MQ or other similar products. It has limited connectivity options and does not easily integrate with legacy systems."
"There could be improvements in the UI for security and scalability."
"It would be beneficial to have the ability to peek at messages currently in Amazon SQS without needing to monitor incoming messages."
"Config management can be better. We are always trying to find the best configs, which is a challenge."
"Confluent has improved aspects like documentation and cloud support, yet Kafka's reliance on older architectures like ZooKeeper in previous versions is a limitation."
"Kafka has some limitations in terms of queue management."
"The solution could always add a few more features to enhance its usage."
"One complexity that I faced with the tool stems from the fact that since it is not kind of a stand-alone application, it won't integrate with native cloud, like AWS or Azure."
"Kafka has a lot of monitors, but sometimes it's most important to just have a simple monitor."
"Apache Kafka could improve data loss and compatibility with Spark."
"The solution can improve by having automation for developers. We have done many manual calculations and it has been difficult but if it was automated it would be much better."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Amazon SQS is more affordable compared to other solutions."
"The pricing model is pay-as-you-use. It depends on your usage and configuration."
"Amazon SQS is moderately priced."
"The pricing of Amazon SQS is reasonable. The first million requests are free every month, and after, it's cost 40 cents for every million requests. There are not any additional fees."
"SQS's pricing is very good - I would rate it nine out of ten."
"Compared to EC2 and other services, Amazon SQS' pricing is cheaper."
"Compared to the other options and based on what I have heard, Amazon SQS is relatively more expensive, but it is not insanely expensive."
"Amazon SQS offers a generous free tier, beyond which it remains very cost-effective. The cost per million messages is less than a dollar, making it an economical choice."
"It is approximately $600,000 USD."
"This is an open-source solution and is free to use."
"The solution is free, it is open-source."
"I rate Apache Kafka's pricing a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. There are no additional costs apart from the licensing fees for Apache Kafka."
"It's a bit cheaper compared to other Q applications."
"Apache Kafka is an open-source solution and there are no fees, but there are fees associated with confluence, which are based on subscription."
"The price for the enterprise version is quite high. For on-premise, there is an annual fee, which starts at 60,000 euros, but it is usually higher than 100,000 euros. The cost for a project including the subscription is usually between 100,000 to 200,000 euros. The cost also depends on the level of support. There are two different levels of support."
"I would not subscribe to the Confluent platform, but rather stay on the free open source version. The extra cost wasn't justified."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
31%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon SQS?
AWS provides another messaging service, which is fine for certain purposes. SQS meets the cloud messaging workload requirements. However, combining the features of both products could be an easier ...
What is your primary use case for Amazon SQS?
I primarily use SQL Server for messaging services, and I need to offer loose couplings. SQS is handy for offloading non-urgent tasks that can be reverted later. I use it as a queue management servi...
What are the differences between Apache Kafka and IBM MQ?
Apache Kafka is open source and can be used for free. It has very good log management and has a way to store the data used for analytics. Apache Kafka is very good if you have a high number of user...
What do you like most about Apache Kafka?
Apache Kafka is an open-source solution that can be used for messaging or event processing.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Kafka?
The open-source version of Apache Kafka results in minimal costs, mainly linked to accessing documentation and limited support. Enterprises usually opt for the more cost-effective open-source edition.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EMS, NASA, BMW, Capital One
Uber, Netflix, Activision, Spotify, Slack, Pinterest
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon SQS vs. Apache Kafka and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.