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

Cassandra vs MongoDB Enterprise Advanced comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

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

Cassandra
Ranking in NoSQL Databases
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Vector Databases (14th)
MongoDB Enterprise Advanced
Ranking in NoSQL Databases
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
Open Source Databases (6th), Managed NoSQL Databases (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Cassandra is 7.9%, down from 11.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MongoDB Enterprise Advanced is 13.9%, down from 20.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
NoSQL Databases Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
MongoDB Enterprise Advanced13.9%
Cassandra7.9%
Other78.2%
NoSQL Databases
 

Q&A Highlights

it_user1272297 - PeerSpot reviewer
Special Adviser Strategy at a university with 501-1,000 employees
Apr 19, 2020
 

Featured Reviews

Monirul Islam Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Head, Data Integration & Management at a non-profit with 10,001+ employees
Has maintained secure document storage and efficient data distribution with peer-to-peer architecture
The functions or features in Cassandra that I have found most valuable are that it is a distributed system similar to Mongo. It's good enough for comparison with another SQL database, so it's smooth and organized for distributed database system. The peer-to-peer architecture in Cassandra is helpful for network decentralization, and I have already introduced that feature. Cassandra features in peer-to-peer as well as another monitoring, so basically, it's good enough for our service. The tunable consistency level in Cassandra is good, and we are using that feature already. In terms of built-in caching and lightweight transactions in Cassandra, the transaction level is good, and it's optimized, so there are no more issues in that database. Based on my experience, Cassandra is good for document management system, as well as distributed database system, and the automatic recovery process is there. Additionally, the database monitoring system or auditing system is well-comparable with other database systems, so we are actually happy to be using this Cassandra database.
FG
Architecte Cloud at Visiativ SA
Offers reliable engine for legacy needs but requires enhanced cost management and AI features
While MongoDB is a good product, it is also an expensive product for support, and its scalability is acceptable, but the big problem with MongoDB is the cost. For security in MongoDB, we work with encrypted databases by default, but we have not contracted the security options in our contract because it is too expensive, so we only implement encrypted databases without the security pack, which is very expensive for us; in security, we are at the first steps, just using encrypted databases. I think additional features needed in MongoDB include perhaps vector databases, as I think they are not supported right now.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Some of the valued features of this solution are it has good performance and failover."
"The most valuable features of Cassandra are the NoSQL database, high performance, and zero-copy streaming."
"Cassandra has some features that are more useful for specific use cases where you have time series where you have huge amounts of writes. That should be quick, but not specifically the reads. We needed to have quicker reads and writes and this is why we are using Cassandra right now."
"The most valuable features are the counter features and the NoSQL schema. It also has good scalability. You can scale Cassandra to any finite level."
"Can achieve continuous data without a single downtime because of node to node ring architecture."
"Overall, I would rate Cassandra as nine because of its fast writes, which really suit our use cases mostly."
"The most valuable feature of Cassandra is its fast retrieval. Additionally, the solution can handle large amounts of data. It is the quickest application we use."
"Based on my experience, Cassandra is good for document management system, as well as distributed database system, and the automatic recovery process is there."
"I think that MongoDB isn't too structured, and that's good for our technical team because they are able to search through the database better than if they are using SQL Server."
"It is convenient to use because we can do manipulations with the JSON data that we get. There are also a lot of joins and associations with MongoDB, which makes it easy to use for us."
"The tool is also user-friendly."
"It is very fast - faster than an SQL or MySQL Server."
"The solution's most important aspect is its seamless database."
"I like the schemaless architecture that it follows. I also like the sharding that it provides."
"Scalability seems good. I've never been even close to finding the limits. I've run a couple of notes of redundancy but I've never had any problems with scalability."
"The most valuable feature of MongoDB is the predefined functions available when using Node.js. These functions simplify the query process, making it user-friendly and straightforward."
 

Cons

"There could be more integration, and it could be more user-friendly."
"We experience configuration issues when accommodating the volumes we require, which often necessitates consultation with the Cassandra development team."
"Interface is not user friendly."
"There were challenges with the query language and the development interface. The query language, in particular, could be improved for better optimization. These challenges were encountered while using the Java SDK."
"The solution doesn't have joins between tables so you need other tools for that."
"While Cassandra can handle NoSQL, I think there should be more flexibility for whole schema design when data is stored in wide columns. Additionally, I believe that eventual consistency should be enhanced."
"Cassandra could be more user-friendly like MongoDB."
"Cassandra is very complex to manage. Sometimes, I need to involve a senior DevOps engineer if we encounter a problem."
"I have found the solution difficult to operate as an administrator."
"MongoDB could be more secure."
"The stability could be better."
"The solution could include more integrations with other platforms."
"The on-premises version of the solution is still pretty expensive, especially compared to the cloud version."
"It has certain limitations when it comes to handling hierarchical data, enforcing relationships, and performing complex joins, which should be taken into account when designing databases for applications with intricate data requirements."
"From my point of view, they need a totally free IDE to work at high levels."
"The auto transaction feature is something that I found a little bit problematic. If we want to run two or three transactions at a time, we get write conflicts. So, it becomes really difficult when concurrency comes into the picture."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't have the specific numbers on pricing, but it was fairly priced."
"We pay for a license."
"Cassandra is a free open source solution, but there is a commercial version available called DataStax Enterprise."
"There are licensing fees that must be paid, but I'm not sure if they are paid monthly or yearly."
"I use the tool's open-source version."
"We are using the open-source version of Cassandra, the solution is free."
"The solution is open source so is free."
"If you want support with the solution you will need to purchase a license and not use the open-source version. The license is a little expensive."
"MongoDB is a free solution. We wanted to have high availability and the subscription cost was quite expensive because the basic one is free and then when you want to have some other replications or other features you will need to pay money. Overall the solution is expensive."
"At the moment, all customers are using the community version."
"I believe that MongoDB is free."
"It's open-source."
"It's a community edition, so we do not pay anything."
"MongoDB's pricing is not reasonable, but it is not as expensive as the others."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.
882,637 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

it_user1272297 - PeerSpot reviewer
Special Adviser Strategy at a university with 501-1,000 employees
Apr 19, 2020
Apr 19, 2020
I haven't used SQream personally. However, if you are only considering GPU based rdbms's please check the following https://hackernoon.com/which-gpu-database-is-right-for-me-6ceef6a17505
2 out of 4 answers
Russell Rothstein - PeerSpot reviewer
CEO at PeerSpot
Jan 27, 2020
Morten, the most popular comparisons of SQream can be found here: https://www.itcentralstation.com/products/sqream-db-alternatives-and-competitors The top ones include Cassandra, MemSQL, MongoDB, and Vertica.
reviewer1219965 - PeerSpot reviewer
Data Architect at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Jan 27, 2020
I haven't used SQream personally. However, if you are only considering GPU based rdbms's please check the following https://hackernoon.com/which-gpu-database-is-right-for-me-6ceef6a17505
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise14
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business35
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise38
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cassandra?
The use of Cassandra in real-time data analytics has been pivotal for our e-commerce platform. As our platform operates 24/7, providing services to sellers and customers alike, the need for real-ti...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cassandra?
The pricing for Cassandra is a little bit high, so it would be better for our community services if they consider community pricing for any non-profit organization like an NGO or other things. It w...
What needs improvement with Cassandra?
Regarding areas of improvement for Cassandra, currently, we are not facing significant issues. Some issues arise from our vendors like Apache slowness and distribution or load balancing from HAProx...
What do you like most about MongoDB?
MongoDB's approach to handling data in documents rather than traditional tables has been particularly beneficial.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MongoDB?
For a small company, the cost of MongoDB Enterprise Advanced is reasonable, but for heavy data usage, we see a little bit of cost pressure but it's acceptable. I will not be able to elaborate on th...
What needs improvement with MongoDB?
The integration between data warehouse could be improved. Nowadays, a lot of data is getting generated, so certain ETL flexible scripts with backend database integrations would be an improvement I ...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

1. Apple 2. Netflix 3. Facebook 4. Instagram 5. Twitter 6. eBay 7. Spotify 8. Uber 9. Airbnb 10. Adobe 11. Cisco 12. IBM 13. Microsoft 14. Yahoo 15. Reddit 16. Pinterest 17. Salesforce 18. LinkedIn 19. Hulu 20. Airbnb 21. Walmart 22. Target 23. Sony 24. Intel 25. Cisco 26. HP 27. Oracle 28. SAP 29. GE 30. Siemens 31. Volkswagen 32. Toyota
Facebook, MetLife, City of Chicago, Expedia, eBay, Google
Find out what your peers are saying about Cassandra vs. MongoDB Enterprise Advanced and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,637 professionals have used our research since 2012.