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

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
3rd
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
5th
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 March 2026, in the Streaming Analytics category, the mindshare of Azure Stream Analytics is 5.4%, down from 11.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Confluent is 6.9%, down from 8.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Azure Stream Analytics5.4%
Confluent6.9%
Other87.7%
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 solution's technical support is good."
"The support on critical issues depends on the level of subscription that you have with Microsoft itself; their support is very excellent, they understand the case immediately, they start to propose solutions and give you help, and if needed, they can work with you and you can connect with them just to explain more."
"Technical support is pretty helpful."
"Provides deep integration with other Azure resources."
"The most valuable features of Azure Stream Analytics are the ease of provisioning and the interface is not terribly complex."
"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."
"Any time I needed assistance, they were helpful."
"We find the query editor feature of this solution extremely valuable for our business."
"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"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."
"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"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."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"The biggest benefit of Confluent as a tool is that it is a distributed platform that provides more durability and stability."
"The benefit is escaping email communication. Sometimes people ignore emails or put them into spam, but with Confluence, everyone sees the same text at the same time."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
 

Cons

"More flexibility in terms of writing queries and accommodating additional facilities would be beneficial."
"There is a lack of technical support from Microsoft's local office, particularly in Taiwan."
"I would like to have a contact individual at Microsoft."
"Azure Stream Analytics is challenging to customize because it's not very flexible."
"There are too many products in the Azure landscape, which sometimes leads to overlap between them."
"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."
"We would like to have centralized platform altogether since we have different kind of options for data ingestion. Sometimes it gets difficult to manage different platforms."
"The solution's interface could be simpler to understand for non-technical people."
"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."
"There is a limitation when it comes to seamlessly importing Microsoft documents into Confluent pages, which can be inconvenient for users who frequently work with Microsoft Office tools and need to transition their content to Confluent."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"Confluence could improve the server version of the solution. However, most companies are going to the cloud."
"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."
"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."
"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."
 

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."
"I rate the price of Azure Stream Analytics a four out of five."
"We pay approximately $500,000 a year. It's approximately $10,000 a year per license."
"The current price is substantial."
"The product's price is at par with the other solutions provided by the other cloud service providers in the market."
"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."
"Azure Stream Analytics is a little bit expensive."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"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.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
11%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

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 Enterprise16
 

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 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

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: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.