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 (29th)
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

"Low-code development is the most valuable feature."
"Boomi iPaaS has substantially reduced operational costs by providing out-of-the-box connectors that expedite the integration process with enterprise systems."
"The best features are that it is a cloud-based and a multi-tenant tool."
"I like the tool's optimization feature."
"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 Salesforce and NetSuite Application specific “connectors” provide a layer of abstraction on top of the SOAP-based APIs to streamline integration development."
"It's very user-friendly and designed to be easy to use for the end user."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"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."
"We ensure seamless management of Kafka through Confluent, allowing all of our Kafka activities to be handled by a third party."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"The biggest benefit of Confluent as a tool is that it is a distributed platform that provides more durability and stability."
"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
 

Cons

"Have to create some of our own pre-built connectors."
"The deployment was simple, but the implementation is missing a lot of capabilities."
"There are very few string handling functions and few mathematical functions are available."
"The solution is complex. There's a few items and features that are hard to understand. They should work to simplify the functionality so new users don't struggle."
"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."
"Documentation could be improved."
"Lots of enhancements are needed in the API portal so that the developers can view the definitions, try out the APIs, etc."
"We would like to see more involvement between Dell Boomi and the end-users to help improve the customer experience."
"Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools."
"It could be more user-friendly and centralized. A way to reduce redundancy would be helpful."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"It would help if the knowledge based documents in the support portal could be available for public use as well."
"I am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"There could be an easy-to-understand licensing model."
"Approximately 20k annually."
"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 pricing is not reasonable at all. It's very high."
"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"
"The cost of the solution is in the neighborhood of $20,000 annually. There are no costs above the standard licensing fee."
"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."
"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."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"It comes with a high cost."
"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.
882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
5%
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 ...
 

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: February 2026.
882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.