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

Boomi iPaaS 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

Boomi iPaaS
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (3rd), Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies (18th), AI Observability (23rd)
Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Boomi iPaaS and Confluent aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Boomi iPaaS is designed for Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) and holds a mindshare of 8.0%, down 9.4% compared to last year.
Confluent, on the other hand, focuses on Streaming Analytics, holds 6.9% mindshare, down 8.6% since last year.
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Boomi iPaaS8.0%
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform6.7%
Microsoft Azure Logic Apps6.0%
Other79.3%
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
Streaming Analytics Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Confluent6.9%
Apache Flink10.9%
Databricks9.0%
Other73.2%
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

PN
Integration and Solution Architect/AI Engineer (Boomi and Workday) at Tech Bridger
Enables swift integration and automation for seamless order-to-cash processes
Boomi iPaaS offers different modules based on customer use cases, which I find valuable. The integrations and API management are particularly beneficial. The setup process is straightforward, and within three days, you can start working on Boomi iPaaS. It provides automation for everything from order to cash, which is thoroughly documented, tracked, and streamlined within Boomi iPaaS. Additionally, Boomi aids initiatives involving AI by allowing prompts to create integrations and automatically generating documentation.
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

"I really appreciate the on-the-go access through the browser and the B2B integration."
"It is a low-code and high-configuration platform, which is very valuable. Develop once and run anywhere is another useful feature. It also has connectors for more than 200 applications. It provides value for money. Our customers who have implemented this solution have a very high ROI."
"The solution has a lot of connectors, which is quite helpful."
"This is a fairly easy-to-use tool for integration which can be self-taught for those with a bit of a technical background."
"Boomi iPaaS makes it easy to organize ETL procedures that populate data warehouses."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring part to debug certain issues and find problems."
"The best features are that it is a cloud-based and a multi-tenant tool."
"The integration landscape has become complex, and having a data strategy with unified data models would make integration easier for any platform, including Boomi."
"We ensure seamless management of Kafka through Confluent, allowing all of our Kafka activities to be handled by a third party."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"The features I find most useful in Confluent are the Multi-Region Cluster, MRC, and the Cluster Linking for replication."
"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."
 

Cons

"We encountered stability issues occasionally, one to two times a year."
"Documentation could be improved."
"In day-to-day operations, tracking transactions is a major challenge. It takes hours to track a single transaction. It is not a straightforward process."
"In my experience, I haven't encountered any major issues with the tool. However, there could be a learning curve for new users, especially depending on which tool you're using. For example, I've used MuleSoft in the past, which is more code-oriented and requires knowledge of Java. Transitioning to Boomi AtomSphere Integration took me a couple of months because of differences in terminology."
"I think data governance and data catalog are areas that Boomi iPaaS can focus on."
"There are stability issues."
"There are still some areas that need improvement. For example, when updates are going on, the product becomes very slow."
"The product's UI could be more convenient."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"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."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When it comes to pricing, it's not so much about being less expensive as it is about how they don't tie to the hardware on the underlined VMware that you run on, as other vendors do"
"There could be an easy-to-understand licensing model."
"AtomSphere Integration's pricing is competitive, and I would rate it seven out of ten."
"This solution is very economical (based on the connections)."
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"The Platinum package is good for licensing, but I’m not sure about the cost and improvements."
"They do not charge by the number of people using the software (client-server model), but rather they charge based on the number of connections used. This makes it very cost effective."
"Boomi AtomSphere Integration is expensive. I rate its pricing an eight out of ten."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"It comes with a high cost."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"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."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
884,656 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
11%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise16
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Boomi AtomSphere Integration?
The tool's most valuable features I've found are related to debugging and testing. It makes it easy to track execution, documents, and process history. This functionality is particularly useful for...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Boomi AtomSphere Integration?
The pricing for Boomi iPaaS is reasonable, costing around $6,000 per year. It is affordable even for small customers, like a salon with a couple of branches.
What needs improvement with Boomi AtomSphere Integration?
I think data governance and data catalog are areas that Boomi iPaaS can focus on. Informatica has data catalog and data lineage functionalities, in addition to their ETL capabilities. Boomi iPaaS c...
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

Boomi
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DocuSign Inc., Innotas, Certent, Renesas Electronics America (REA), Kelly-Moore Paints, Mindjet, City of McKinney, Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers (RBA), Daylight Transport, A10 Networks
ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Salesforce, Boomi and others in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS). Updated: February 2026.
884,656 professionals have used our research since 2012.