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

Apache Kafka vs IBM Event Streams 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

Apache Kafka
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (6th)
IBM Event Streams
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Apache Kafka and IBM Event Streams aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Apache Kafka is designed for Streaming Analytics and holds a mindshare of 3.5%, down 3.8% compared to last year.
IBM Event Streams, on the other hand, focuses on Message Queue (MQ) Software, holds 2.9% mindshare, up 1.4% since last year.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache Kafka3.5%
Databricks7.4%
Apache Flink6.7%
Other82.4%
Streaming Analytics
Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM Event Streams2.9%
IBM MQ21.4%
ActiveMQ20.1%
Other55.6%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Amandeep Pawar - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineer Technology at Iris Software Technologies Private Limited
Event-driven architecture has improved asynchronous communication and supports high throughput
We can improve the high throughput because there are some limitations. We could add something to improve Apache Kafka. Based on my daily usage and analysis, there is a complex setup and management, which is one area requiring improvement. Apache Kafka does not have built-in message delay or scheduling capabilities. Apache Kafka cannot natively schedule messages. Limited message prioritization is also an area requiring improvement. Ordering is limited to a single partition. Large messages affect performance. Apache Kafka is optimized for many small to medium-sized messages, but large payloads increase network usage, increase disk usage, and slow down producers and consumers. I rate Apache Kafka eight out of ten instead of ten out of ten because operating an Apache Kafka cluster requires expertise in partitioning, application monitoring, and capacity planning. Self-managed deployment can become complex as the cluster grows. Pro-managed Apache Kafka services significantly reduce the operational overhead.
Ismail El-Dahshan - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at areebah
Efficiently calculates data flow and provides ease of integration
We seamlessly integrated IBM Event Streams with real data processes by establishing data consumers. The consumers act as end-users, initiating requests and receiving responses from the data provider. The system efficiently processes and calculates the data flow within the cluster using DLP functionality. It provides an easy integration, particularly in creating a platform and facilitating interactions between subscribers and service providers. I rate it an eight out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The processing power of Apache Kafka is good when you have requirements for high throughput and a large number of consumers."
"The stream processing is a very valuable aspect of the solution for us."
"Kafka rendered itself suitable for our product offering, as it supports all the necessary requirements for a real-time pipeline."
"The use of Kafka's logging mechanism has been extremely beneficial for us, as it allows us to sequence messages, track pointers, and manage memory without having to create multiple copies."
"With such a large digest, I was genuinely impressed at the process being almost real-time."
"It is a stable solution...A lot of my experience indicates that Apache Kafka is scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the performance."
"Apache Kafka is very fast and stable."
"The system efficiently processes and calculates the data flow within the cluster using DLP functionality."
"The triggering scenarios and routing scenarios are all good, making it a very useful solution for financial institutions."
"I am happy with the product, other than pricing I don't have any other improvements that I can suggest."
"The stability has been good."
"I'm an administrator, and what I like most is the interface, the security, and the storage."
 

Cons

"We used to have problems in Kafka every three weeks and our dev ops team fixed a few issues."
"The initial setup and deployment could be less complex."
"The manageability should be improved. There are lots of things we need to manage and it should have a function that enables us to manage them all cohesively."
"We haven't seen a return on investment with Apache Kafka. It's used for a specific use case rather than cost reduction."
"Apache Kafka can improve by adding a feature out of the box which allows it to deliver only one message."
"The GUI tools for monitoring and support are still very basic and not very rich. There is no help in determining a shard key for performance."
"More adapters for connecting to different systems need to be available."
"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."
"It would be helpful if they could help us explain why they, as in, the customers, should use the product and the overall benefits."
"The pricing needs to be improved."
"The product's interface needs improvement."
"In the next release, I would like to see the GUI allow you to configure the security section."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is open source."
"I would not subscribe to the Confluent platform, but rather stay on the free open source version. The extra cost wasn't justified."
"Apache Kafka is open-source and can be used free of charge."
"The solution is free, it is open-source."
"Kafka is open-source and it is cheaper than any other product."
"Apache Kafka has an open-source pricing."
"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."
"Apache Kafka is an open-source solution."
"The platform is averagely priced."
"The pricing needs to be improved."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
920,223 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise51
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Kafka?
Based on my understanding for the setup and cost to set up Apache Kafka, I was not responsible for the pricing or licensing decisions. Apache Kafka itself is open source and free to use. Infrastruc...
What needs improvement with Apache Kafka?
We can improve the high throughput because there are some limitations. We could add something to improve Apache Kafka. Based on my daily usage and analysis, there is a complex setup and management,...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Uber, Netflix, Activision, Spotify, Slack, Pinterest
American Airlines, UBank, Bitly, Eurobits, Active International, Bison, Contextor, Constance Hotels, Resorts & Golf, Creval, Deloitte, ExxonMobil, FaceMe, FacePhi, Fitzsoft, Fuga Technologies, Guardio, Honeywell, Japanese airline, Jenzabar, KONE
Find out what your peers are saying about Databricks, Microsoft, Apache and others in Streaming Analytics. Updated: October 2026.
920,223 professionals have used our research since 2012.