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
7.3
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (4th), Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies (16th), AI Observability (30th)
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 8.3%, down 8.9% compared to last year.
Confluent, on the other hand, focuses on Streaming Analytics, holds 6.8% mindshare, down 8.5% since last year.
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Boomi iPaaS8.3%
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform6.8%
Microsoft Azure Logic Apps6.5%
Other78.4%
Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS)
Streaming Analytics Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Confluent6.8%
Apache Flink11.3%
Databricks9.5%
Other72.4%
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

"The connection configuration part and the drag-and-drop integration module are the most valuable features for me."
"We work on the flow between systems and the most valuable features for that purpose are the mapping of data, interface mapping, and data integration."
"This solution has a user-friendly interface and very good documentation with solutions that helped us in working with the tool efficiently."
"The maturity of the product is significant."
"The Salesforce and NetSuite Application specific “connectors” provide a layer of abstraction on top of the SOAP-based APIs to streamline integration development."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"It's very user-friendly and designed to be easy to use for the end user."
"This is a fairly easy-to-use tool for integration which can be self-taught for those with a bit of a technical background."
"Confluent facilitates the messaging tasks with Kafka, streamlining our processes effectively."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"The features I find most useful in Confluent are the Multi-Region Cluster, MRC, and the Cluster Linking for replication."
"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
"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."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"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."
"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
 

Cons

"There is no validation in the mapping profile custom scripting, such as IntelliSense or advanced error checking."
"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."
"There are still some areas that need improvement. For example, when updates are going on, the product becomes very slow."
"Although Boomi iPaaS is top in the market, there might be room for improvement in the ETL aspect, which was recently integrated as another module. This aspect of Boomi iPaaS is not mature enough at the moment."
"There should be more scripting possibilities."
"The API can use some work to come up to speed with the competition but Dell has plans and is working on resolving that."
"We would like to see more involvement between Dell Boomi and the end-users to help improve the customer experience."
"They need to introduce more configurable functions to remove scripting or coding. Scripting should be minimized. It should have exhaustive functions. Currently, it lacks in this aspect."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. 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."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AtomSphere Integration's pricing is competitive, and I would rate it seven out of ten."
"The pricing is a bit complex. While the entry fee may be lower than other solutions, it could be expensive depending on your usage."
"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."
"It is an expensive platform."
"The licensing model of Dell Boomi is based on a ‘pay-per-use’ model."
"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"Approximately 20k annually."
"The pricing is not reasonable at all. It's very high."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"It comes with a high cost."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"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."
"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."
"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.
882,103 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Retailer
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise15
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 ...
 

Comparisons

 

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, Informatica and others in Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS). Updated: January 2026.
882,103 professionals have used our research since 2012.