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

Azure Stream Analytics vs Confluent comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 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

Azure Stream Analytics
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
2nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Confluent
Ranking in Streaming Analytics
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Azure Stream Analytics is 7.0%, down from 9.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Confluent is 6.6%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azure Stream Analytics7.0%
Confluent6.6%
Other86.4%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Chandra Mani - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical architect at Tech Mahindra
Has supported real-time data validation and processing across multiple use cases but can improve consumer-side integration and streamlined customization
I widely use AKS, Azure Kubernetes Service, Azure App Service, and there are APM Gateway kinds of things. I also utilize API Management and Front Door to expose any multi-region application I have, including Web Application Firewalls, and many more—around 20 to 60 services. I use Key Vault for managing secrets and monitoring Azure App Insights for tracing and monitoring. Additionally, I employ AI search for indexer purposes, processing chatbot data or any GenAI integration. I widely use OpenAI for GenAI, integrating various models with our platform. I extensively use hybrid cloud solutions to connect on-premise cloud or cloud to another network, employing public private endpoints or private link service endpoints. Azure DevOps is also on my list, and I leverage many security concepts for end-to-end design. I consider how end users access applications to data storage and secure the entire platform for authenticated users across various use cases, including B2C, B2B, or employee scenarios. I also widely design multi-tenant applications, utilizing Azure AD or Azure AD B2C for consumers. Azure Stream Analytics reads from any real-time stream; it's designed for processing millions of records every millisecond. They utilize Event Hubs for this purpose, as it allows for event processing. After receiving data from various sources, we validate and store it in a data store. Azure Stream Analytics can consume data from Event Hubs, applying basic validation rules to determine the validity of each record before processing.
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

"The biggest improvement for us has been that it now takes much less time for us to receive valuable information."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"We use Azure Stream Analytics for simulation and internal activities."
"I like the IoT part. We have mostly used Azure Stream Analytics services for it"
"It's great for streaming and makes everything easy to handle."
"The most valuable features of Azure Stream Analytics are the ease of provisioning and the interface is not terribly complex."
"It was easy for me to use from the beginning. I am accustomed to working with Microsoft."
"The life cycle, report management and crash management features are great."
"The most valuable feature that we are using is the data replication between the data centers allowing us to configure a disaster recovery or software. However, is it's not mandatory to use and because most of the features that we use are from Apache Kafka, such as end-to-end encryption. Internally, we can develop our own kind of product or service from Apache Kafka."
"I would rate the scalability of the solution at eight out of ten. We have 20 people who use Confluent in our organization now, and we hope to increase usage in the future."
"A person with a good IT background and HTML will not have any trouble with Confluent."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"Confluent facilitates the messaging tasks with Kafka, streamlining our processes effectively."
"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
 

Cons

"There is a need for improvement in reprocessing or validation without custom code. Azure Stream Analytics currently allows some degree of code writing, which could be simplified with low-code or no-code platforms to enhance performance."
"It is not complex, but it requires some development skills. When the data is sent from Azure Stream Analytics to Power BI, I don't have the access to modify the data. I can't customize or edit the data or do some queries. All queries need to be done in the Azure Stream Analytics."
"The pricing is a little bit high."
"The solution could be improved by providing better graphics and including support for UI and UX testing."
"I would like to have a contact individual at Microsoft."
"Azure Stream Analytics could improve by having clearer metrics as to the scale, more metrics around the data set size that is flowing through it, and performance tuning recommendations."
"One area that could use improvement is the handling of data validation. Currently, there is a review process, but sometimes the validation fails even before the job is executed. This results in wasted time as we have to rerun the job to identify the failure."
"More flexibility in terms of writing queries and accommodating additional facilities would be beneficial."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"It would be great if the knowledge based documents in the support portal could be available for public use as well."
"Confluent has fallen behind in being the tool of the industry. It's taking second place to things such as Word and SharePoint and other office tools that are more dynamic and flexible than Confluent."
"It could have more themes. They should also have more reporting-oriented plugins as well. It would be great to have free custom reports that can be dispatched directly from Jira."
"The pricing was high for our needs. We should not have to pay for features we do not use."
"The Schema Registry service could be improved. I would like a bigger knowledge base of other use cases and more technical forums. It would be good to have more flexible monitoring features added to the next release as well."
"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 requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are different tiers based on retention policies. There are four tiers. The pricing varies based on steaming units and tiers. The standard pricing is $10/hour."
"When scaling up, the pricing for Azure Stream Analytics can get relatively high. Considering its capabilities compared to other solutions, I would rate it a seven out of ten for cost. However, we've found ways to optimize costs using tools like Databricks for specific tasks."
"The licensing for this product is payable on a 'pay as you go' basis. This means that the cost is only based on data volume, and the frequency that the solution is used."
"The product's price is at par with the other solutions provided by the other cloud service providers in the market."
"Azure Stream Analytics is a little bit expensive."
"We pay approximately $500,000 a year. It's approximately $10,000 a year per license."
"The current price is substantial."
"The cost of this solution is less than competitors such as Amazon or Google Cloud."
"Confluent is an expensive 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 an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"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."
"Regarding pricing, I think Confluent is a premium product, but it's hard for me to say definitively if it's overly expensive. We're still trying to understand if the features and reduced maintenance complexity justify the cost, especially as we scale our platform use."
"It comes with a high cost."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is low pricing and ten is high pricing, I would rate Confluent's pricing at five. I have not encountered any additional costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
905,601 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
University
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise18
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise17
 

Questions from the Community

Which would you choose - Databricks or Azure Stream Analytics?
Databricks is an easy-to-set-up and versatile tool for data management, analysis, and business analytics. For analytics teams that have to interpret data to further the business goals of their orga...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Stream Analytics?
Azure charges in various ways based on incoming and outgoing data processing activities. Choosing between pay-as-you-go or enterprise models can affect pricing, and depending on data volume, charge...
What needs improvement with Azure Stream Analytics?
There is a need for improvement in reprocessing or validation without custom code. Azure Stream Analytics currently allows some degree of code writing, which could be simplified with low-code or no...
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 ...
What is your primary use case for Confluent?
The main use cases for Confluent are log aggregation and streaming. I'm familiar with Confluent stream processing with KSQL. KSQL helps in terms of data analytics strategies because if we are the d...
 

Also Known As

ASA
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rockwell Automation, Milliman, Honeywell Building Solutions, Arcoflex Automation Solutions, Real Madrid C.F., Aerocrine, Ziosk, Tacoma Public Schools, P97 Networks
ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Stream Analytics vs. Confluent and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
905,601 professionals have used our research since 2012.