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

Apache Kafka vs IBM Event Streams comparison

 

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
6.8
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 3.9%, up 3.0% compared to last year.
IBM Event Streams, on the other hand, focuses on Message Queue (MQ) Software, holds 2.9% mindshare, up 1.0% since last year.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Apache Kafka3.9%
Apache Flink8.2%
Databricks7.9%
Other80.0%
Streaming Analytics
Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM Event Streams2.9%
IBM MQ20.7%
ActiveMQ19.8%
Other56.6%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Varuns Ug - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Developer at NIT
Event-driven workflows have improved payment processing and reduced latency across services
One area for improvement in Apache Kafka is operational complexity. Running and maintaining an Apache Kafka cluster at scale involves handling partitions, replications, retention policies, rebalancing, and monitoring, which requires strong expertise. Debugging and observability can be complex in large systems, as troubleshooting issues such as consumer lag, offset management problems, or uneven partition distribution can become challenging. The learning curve is relatively steep, requiring a good understanding of concepts such as partition, consumer group, offset commit, and delivery guarantees to avoid subtle production issues. One area where Apache Kafka could improve is the developer experience around debugging and tracing events end to end. In distributed systems, when an event passes through multiple topics and consumer services, troubleshooting can become time-consuming. Better built-in observability for tracing event flows across services would be very useful.
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

"The solution is stable, and the most fantastic thing about it is its throughput."
"It is easy to configure."
"The high availability is valuable. It is robust, and we can rely on it for a huge amount of data."
"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."
"We used to lose some of our messages when we integrated them in bulk, this solution has stopped that happening."
"Other than the problems with having no control over the queue, Apache Kafka is wonderful."
"The most valuable feature is the messaging function and reliability."
"We get amazing throughput. We don't get any delay."
"I'm an administrator, and what I like most is the interface, the security, and the storage."
"The stability has been good."
"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."
 

Cons

"Config management can be better."
"Kafka is a nightmare to administer."
"We cannot apply all of our security requirements because it is hard to upload them."
"We struggled a bit with the built-in data transformations because it was a challenge to get them up and running the way we wanted."
"The management overhead is more compared to the messaging system. There are challenges here and there. Like for long usage, it requires restarts and nodes from time to time."
"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."
"Too much dependency on the zookeeper and leader selection is still the bottleneck for Kafka implementation."
"The solution's initial setup process was complex."
"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 product's interface needs improvement."
"In the next release, I would like to see the GUI allow you to configure the security section."
"The pricing needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When starting to look at a distributed message system, look for a cloud solution first. It is an easier entry point than an on-premises hardware solution."
"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."
"Apache Kafka is an open-source solution."
"Kafka is open-source and it is cheaper than any other product."
"Apache Kafka has an open-source pricing."
"Apache Kafka is free."
"It's quite affordable considering the value it provides."
"I was using the product's free version."
"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.
896,942 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
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?
Its pricing is reasonable. It's not always about cost, but about meeting specific needs.
What needs improvement with Apache Kafka?
The long-term data storage feature in Apache Kafka depends on the setting, but I believe the maximum duration is seven days.
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 Apache Kafka vs. IBM Event Streams and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
896,942 professionals have used our research since 2012.