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 (3rd)
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 3.6%, up 3.6% compared to last year.
IBM Event Streams, on the other hand, focuses on Message Queue (MQ) Software, holds 3.0% mindshare, up 1.0% since last year.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache Kafka3.6%
Databricks7.4%
Apache Flink7.0%
Other82.0%
Streaming Analytics
Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM Event Streams3.0%
IBM MQ21.3%
ActiveMQ20.0%
Other55.7%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Amandeep Pawar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at Airy 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.
TM
IBM MQ Specialist / Administrator at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Easy to use, stable, has a good interface, and the security is good
I don't know if it's because of experience, but for me, it was easy to install. It's just a matter of having an RPM, then click next, next, and next again. The difficult part comes in when you have to configure the security. That is the most difficult part, but it's not that difficult. It takes less than two hours to install. Two hours max, because I did one yesterday. I installed it on AWS and it was easy to install the software. It was less than an hour for the bare minimum installation. Setting up the security, took close to two hours.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Apache Kafka is very useful in our organization and makes applications more loosely coupled."
"When starting out with minimal hardware, Kafka has a guaranteed delivery mechanism that is very easy to set up and can handle very large data volumes, helping to speed up the timeline from prototype all the way to production volumes."
"It has become dead simple to connect different application and services, saving a lot of development hours."
"It's an open-source product, which means it doesn't cost us anything to use it."
"Its availability is brilliant."
"The solution can handle more speed and has horizontal scalability for both messaging, but more specifically stream processing and data enrichment."
"Kafka is stable, it is a great product."
"The most valuable feature is the messaging function and reliability."
"The triggering scenarios and routing scenarios are all good, making it a very useful solution for financial institutions."
"The system efficiently processes and calculates the data flow within the cluster using DLP functionality."
"I am happy with the product, other than pricing I don't have any other improvements that I can suggest."
"I'm an administrator, and what I like most is the interface, the security, and the storage."
"The stability has been good."
 

Cons

"The initial setup and deployment could be less complex."
"Prioritization of messages in Apache Kafka could improve."
"The solution should be easier to manage. It needs to improve its visualization feature in the next release."
"Kafka is complex and there is a little bit of a learning curve."
"More Windows support, I believe, is one area where it can improve. We need to wrap it as a service, but there isn't one built into Windows."
"GUI for Kafka infrastructure monitoring and deployment"
"I would like to see monitoring service tools."
"Kafka has a lot of monitors, but sometimes it's most important to just have a simple monitor."
"It would be helpful if they could help us explain why they, as in, the customers, should use the product and the overall benefits."
"In the next release, I would like to see the GUI allow you to configure the security section."
"The pricing needs to be improved."
"The product's interface needs improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the solution is low."
"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."
"Kafka is more reasonably priced than IBM MQ."
"We are using the free version of Apache Kafka."
"The price of Apache Kafka is good."
"I would not subscribe to the Confluent platform, but rather stay on the free open source version. The extra cost wasn't justified."
"It is open source software."
"The pricing needs to be improved."
"The platform is averagely priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
911,839 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Outsourcing Company
12%
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: August 2026.
911,839 professionals have used our research since 2012.