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

Axway AMPLIFY Application Integration vs Confluent 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

Axway AMPLIFY Application I...
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (56th)
Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Axway AMPLIFY Application Integration and Confluent aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Axway AMPLIFY Application Integration is designed for Data Integration and holds a mindshare of 0.7%, up 0.3% compared to last year.
Confluent, on the other hand, focuses on Streaming Analytics, holds 6.8% mindshare, down 8.7% since last year.
Data Integration Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Axway AMPLIFY Application Integration0.7%
SSIS4.0%
Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC)3.7%
Other91.6%
Data Integration
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Confluent6.8%
Apache Flink12.3%
Databricks10.0%
Other70.9%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

GC
Principal Solution Architect at a comms service provider with 51-200 employees
The solution is robust and affordable, but it needs to improve its scalability and visibility of integrations
The initial setup is easy. It is very simple to start with. The last release from Axway provided many ways to simplify and speed up integration. The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises. We use Google, Amazon, and Azure as our cloud providers. The time taken for deployment is very short because the tool is robust.
PavanManepalli - PeerSpot reviewer
AVP - Sr Middleware Messaging Integration Engineer at Wells Fargo
Has supported streaming use cases across data centers and simplifies fraud analytics with SQL-based processing
I recommend that Confluent should improve its solution to keep up with competitors in the market, such as Solace and other upcoming tools such as NATS. Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools. They need to improve in that direction by not only reducing costs but also providing better solutions for the problems customers face to avoid frustrations, whether through future enhancement requests or ensuring product stability. The cost should be worked on, and they should provide better solutions for customers. Solutions should focus on hierarchical topics; if a customer has different types of data and sources, they should be able to send them to the same place for analytics. Currently, Confluent requires everything to send to the same topic, which becomes very large and makes running analytics difficult. The hierarchy of topics should be improved. This part is available in MQ and other products such as Solace, but it is missing in Confluent, leading many in capital markets and trading to switch to Solace. In terms of stability, it is not the stability itself that needs improvement but rather the delivery semantics. Other products offer exactly-once delivery out of the box, whereas Confluent states it will offer this but lacks the knobs or levers for tuning configurations effectively. Confluent has hundreds of configurations that application teams must understand, which creates a gap. Users are often unaware of what values to set for better performance or to achieve exactly-once semantics, making it difficult to navigate through them. Delivery semantics also need to be worked on.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Axway AMPLIFY Application Integration is quite a stable solution."
"The product is robust."
"Axway AMPLIFY Application Integration is very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is that API Gateway is extremely flexible for any feature, such as connecting to Active Directory to pull the users and their authentication information. There are three ways to connect to Active Directory, and the reason for this is that the computing environments of our customers are very different. Every feature in API Gateway has got multiple methodologies for accomplishing those tasks, which is important because customers are constantly changing their security models, IT models, networks, etc. API Gateway is very flexible. It is not a one size fits all sort of situation where it is very rigid, and you can only use these pull-down menus, and that's all it ever does. It is much more open than that. It can give you fabulous reports on your users, usage, security issues, and the data sets that are going through there. You'll suddenly have visibility on the movement of data within or between your organization and other organizations. The other thing is that you're connecting API to API, which is machine to machine. The things that were done manually in an Excel spreadsheet before exchanging data through email are now done machine to machine and server to server. It speeds up the velocity of your business."
"A person with a good IT background and HTML will not have any trouble with Confluent."
"Some of the best features are that it's very quick to set up, very easy to have a centralized area that gives us a history of changes, and the ability to give feedback on any information placed onto the pages."
"I find Confluent's Kafka Connectors and Kafka Streams invaluable for my use cases because they simplify real-time data processing and ETL tasks by providing reliable, pre-packaged connectors and tools."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"We ensure seamless management of Kafka through Confluent, allowing all of our Kafka activities to be handled by a third party."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
 

Cons

"Axway AMPLIFY Application Integration is an expensive solution."
"The product must improve its visibility and scalability."
"The most important point to improve is the capability to deploy in large enterprises."
"Because it is so flexible, you really need someone who knows Axway Gateway or has been through the training and is certified. Just because you know APIs doesn't mean you're going to walk into that API Gateway and understand what to click on. If you're going to get something done quickly, you need to find an engineer from a company who has some experience with it. It is easy to learn, but if you're doing on-the-job training, it is going to take you longer to get your project accomplished."
"Currently, in the early stages, I see a gap on the security side. If you are using the SaaS version, we would like to get a fuller, more secure solution that can be adopted right out of the box. Confluence could do a better job sharing best practices or a reusable pattern that others have used, especially for companies that can not afford to hire professional services from Confluent."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"One area we've identified that could be improved is the governance and access control to the Kafka topics. We've found some limitations, like a threshold of 10,000 rules per cluster, that make it challenging to manage access at scale if we have many different data sources."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
"We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is not expensive."
"API Gateway is priced on the number of transactions you run through it. API Gateway is free, and you can install as many API Gateways as you like or are necessary for your network. For example, if all of the data is inside your network or firewall, you may just need one API Gateway. If you have external customers trying to come into your organization through your firewall, you're going to need one API Gateway outside the firewall and one inside the firewall. If you have a lot of remote offices, you may want to put API Gateway in some of those offices as well. They only charge you for your usage of it. In other words, the number of transactions going through it. That's a good benefit."
"Users need to pay an annual licensing fee for the solution."
"The pricing model of Confluent could improve because if you have a classic use case where you're going to use all the features there is no plan to reduce the features. You should be able to pick and choose basic services at a reduced price. The pricing was high for our needs. We should not have to pay for features we do not use."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"Confluence's pricing is quite reasonable, with a cost of around $10 per user that decreases as the number of users increases. Additionally, it's worth noting that for teams of up to 10 users, the solution is completely free."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
879,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Confluent?
I find Confluent's Kafka Connectors and Kafka Streams invaluable for my use cases because they simplify real-time data processing and ETL tasks by providing reliable, pre-packaged connectors and to...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Confluent?
They charge a lot for scaling, which makes it expensive.
What needs improvement with Confluent?
I recommend that Confluent should improve its solution to keep up with competitors in the market, such as Solace and other upcoming tools such as NATS. Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about ...
 

Also Known As

Integrator, Axway Integrator, AMPLIFY Application Integration
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BHF-BANK, BNP Paribas, Continental Corporation Automotive Group, Clearstream MFT, Federal Office of Information Technology, Systems and Telecommunication (FOITT), DHL, Union Nationale de Mutualit_s Socialistes, ZF Group, La Poste, Gassco, IdenTrust, Perugia Hospital, International Post Corporation, Bundesagentur fªr Arbeit (BA), IHC Health Solutions, Lenovo, Genzyme
ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Find out what your peers are saying about Axway AMPLIFY Application Integration vs. Confluent and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.