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
6.4
Number of Reviews
30
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

"Integration-wise, it is a pretty good tool."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring part to debug certain issues and find problems."
"Boomi iPaaS has substantially reduced operational costs by providing out-of-the-box connectors that expedite the integration process with enterprise systems."
"The integration landscape has become complex, and having a data strategy with unified data models would make integration easier for any platform, including Boomi."
"The maturity of the product is significant."
"Boomi iPaaS makes it easy to organize ETL procedures that populate data warehouses."
"I have found the solution to be scalable."
"Extremely flexible for any kind of integration between systems."
"Confluent facilitates the messaging tasks with Kafka, streamlining our processes effectively."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"With Confluent Cloud we no longer need to handle the infrastructure and the plumbing, which is a concern for Confluent. The other advantage is that all portfolios have access to the data that is being shared."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"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 most valuable feature of Confluent is the wide range of features provided. They're leading the market in this category."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
 

Cons

"The product could be a little bit more user-friendly."
"There are still some areas that need improvement. For example, when updates are going on, the product becomes very slow."
"There are very few string handling functions and few mathematical functions are available."
"Have to create some of our own pre-built connectors."
"There are more mature (dedicated) API management and master data management (MDM) solutions available in the market."
"There are stability issues."
"Boomi AtomSphere Integration should scale up on the migration area."
"The API can use some work to come up to speed with the competition but Dell has plans and is working on resolving that."
"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."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"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."
"We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"there is room for improvement in the visualization."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"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

"Boomi AtomSphere Integration is expensive. I rate its pricing an eight out of ten."
"AtomSphere Integration's pricing is competitive, and I would rate it seven out of ten."
"The Platinum package is good for licensing, but I’m not sure about the cost and improvements."
"The pricing is not reasonable at all. It's very high."
"Approximately 20k annually."
"The licensing model of Dell Boomi is based on a ‘pay-per-use’ model."
"Boomi AtomSphere Integration is a relatively cheap and cost-effective product compared to other products like SAP or Oracle."
"The cost of the solution is in the neighborhood of $20,000 annually. There are no costs above the standard licensing fee."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"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."
"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."
"It comes with a high cost."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
883,896 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
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?
Boomi iPaaS needs better source control. It is not as good as it could be in terms of managing versions and running what-if scenarios.
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.
883,896 professionals have used our research since 2012.