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

AWS Glue vs Rivery comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

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

AWS Glue
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Rivery
Ranking in Cloud Data Integration
19th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (35th), Migration Tools (3rd), Cloud Migration (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Cloud Data Integration category, the mindshare of AWS Glue is 9.8%, down from 19.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rivery is 1.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Data Integration Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
AWS Glue9.8%
Rivery1.1%
Other89.1%
Cloud Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

SC
application security engineer at Hyperspace IT India
Efficient data integration reduces operational time and enhances metadata management
For the initial setup with AWS Glue, I find it easy to set up the data catalog and create Glue jobs using the visual editor or the visual code. Setting permission sets via IAM rules can be a bit tricky at the start, but we ensure Glue has access to AWS S3, Redshift, and other services. Once the role is configured, it runs smoothly. For advanced configurations, connecting to VPCs and setting up connections with JDBC sources takes more time compared to my cloud experience, but overall, for someone with cloud and ETL experience, the setup is manageable and well done.
DM
Manager, Application at a non-profit with 1,001-5,000 employees
Data pipelines have become streamlined and now connect diverse sources with strong support
How Rivery can be improved is a challenging question, but I think something with the graphics could be better because when there is a lot of code inside, it needs to be more user-friendly. I am not talking about the source-to-target, but when we implement a lot of code, you need a different visual of how you use it, such as what you see in DBT. There is a problem where sometimes I run a river and something in the UI does not get refreshed because I think of browser cache limits, which is annoying. I always need to refresh, and then I am not sure, so I have to go inside the river and look in the log to see if it has finished or not, which takes my time. At the end of the day, when I am running the river, I need it to be done before I go to the next step. Something in the UI could work more smoothly to show it easily. I am not sure why it happens, and I am not sure if there is a solution for it, but if it could be more clear, that would be very nice, such as sending an email once the river is really done.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like that it's flexible, powerful, and allows you to write your own queries and scripts to get the needed transformations."
"Transformations are valuable because you can modify or override complex data logic from an open source or Spark to solve issues."
"Its ease of use, cost-effectiveness, and highly secure architecture are some of the most valuable features."
"The solution is serverless so it allows us to transform data while optimizing the cost and performance of Spark jobs."
"It's very good to manage."
"It is a stable and scalable solution."
"AWS Glue is very quick to start without cold starts, unlike AWS Lambda."
"The AWS Glue Data Catalog provides metadata management and schema discovery. AWS Glue simplifies data transformation with automatic schema detection, incremental data updates, and integration with other AWS services."
"Connects to many APIs in the market and new ones are being added all the time."
"The solution's most valuable features are that it is quick to connect and simple to use."
"Rivery has positively impacted my organization by enabling us to create a stable pipeline, and we can expand the variety of the data sources as we go very easily, with no worries, and with a lot of confidence in the fact that it can be done."
 

Cons

"Only people who can code, either in Java or Python, can use the product freely. Those who don't know Java or Python might find using AWS Glue difficult."
"AWS Glue's error handling is difficult."
"AWS Glue would be improved by making it easier to switch from single to multi-cloud."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"It fails to handle massive databases acquired from various sources."
"It would be better if it were more user-friendly. The interesting thing we found is that it was a little strange at the beginning. The way Glue works is not very straightforward. After trying different things, for example, we used just the console to create jobs. Then we realized that things were not working as expected. After researching and learning more, we realized that even though the console creates the script for the ETL processes, you need to modify or write your own script in Spark to do everything you want it to do. For example, we are pulling data from our source database and our application database, which is in Aurora. From there, we are doing the ETL to transform the data and write the results into Redshift. But what was surprising is that it's almost like whatever you want to do, you can do it with Glue because you have the option to put together your own script. Even though there are many functionalities and many connections, you have the opportunity to write your own queries to do whatever transformations you need to do. It's a little deceiving that some options are supposed to work in a certain way when you set them up in the console, but then they are not exactly working the right way or not as expected. It would be better if they provided more examples and more documentation on options."
"Setting up pipelines is challenging, especially with version control and testing requirements."
"The drawbacks associated with the product stem from the fact that, based on the data volume, it can become very costly."
"My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was unfortunately not so good in my recent data project."
"Pricing is a little steep for smaller organizations, I would say. The product's pricing model could be a little bit better."
"Lineage and an impact analysis or logic dependency are lacking."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the tool an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is expensive."
"The overall cost of AWS Glue could be better. It cost approximately $1,000 a month. There is paid support available from AWS Glue."
"The current cost is around forty to fifty thousand a month."
"AWS Glue is a paid service that doesn't come under the free trial of AWS."
"It is not expensive. AWS Glue works on the serverless architecture. We get charged for the time the server is up. For our use case, we have to use it once in a day, and it is not expensive for us."
"The pricing is a bit higher than other solutions like Athena and EC2. If the pricing becomes more scaled or flexible, it will be good because you have to pay 44 cents just for one DPU for an hour. If you increase DPUs to 5 or 10, the pricing gets multiplied. There are also some time limits like 0 to 10 minutes or 10 to 20 minutes. If the pricing is according to the minutes, it would be better because you have to limit your job to 10 minutes or 20 minutes."
"If you are using the solution for an enterprise business, it will be expensive."
"I rate pricing an eight out of ten."
"I rate the tool's price as six out of ten if I consider the lowest price to be one and the highest price to be ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
881,036 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise32
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How do you select the right cloud ETL tool?
AWS Glue and Azure Data factory for ELT best performance cloud services.
How does Talend Open Studio compare with AWS Glue?
We reviewed AWS Glue before choosing Talend Open Studio. AWS Glue is the managed ETL (extract, transform, and load) from Amazon Web Services. AWS Glue enables AWS users to create and manage jobs in...
What are the most common use cases for AWS Glue?
AWS Glue's main use case is for allowing users to discover, prepare, move, and integrate data from multiple sources. The product lets you use this data for analytics, application development, or ma...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rivery?
The tool's price can be a little steep for a small organization. I rate the tool's price as six out of ten if I consider the lowest price to be one and the highest price to be ten.
What needs improvement with Rivery?
I don't know what could be improved in terms of what my company was used to previously or after moving over to Rivery. I have not had much experience with platforms other than Rivery. For me, Rival...
What is your primary use case for Rivery?
My company has started to use the Rivery extract data from Hive. It is like a project management sort of program, and we started to use Rivery to get the data from there over into Mavenlink, so we ...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

bp, Cerner, Expedia, Finra, HESS, intuit, Kellog's, Philips, TIME, workday
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Glue vs. Rivery and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,036 professionals have used our research since 2012.