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

Confluent vs Dataloader.io 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

Confluent
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (4th)
Dataloader.io
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (45th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Confluent and Dataloader.io aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Confluent is designed for Streaming Analytics and holds a mindshare of 8.5%, down 11.4% compared to last year.
Dataloader.io, on the other hand, focuses on Data Integration, holds 0.1% mindshare, up 0.1% since last year.
Streaming Analytics
Data Integration
 

Featured Reviews

Gustavo-Barbosa Dos Santos - PeerSpot reviewer
Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming
Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance. It helps us understand the various requirements of multiple customers and validates the information for different versions. We can automate the tasks using Confluent Kafka. Thus, it guarantees us the data quality and maintains the integrity of message contracts.
Aditi Bhardwaj - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides an ease of access and an automated mapping feature
We need help with large data migrations. It only works well for a few thousand records or less than a million records. Above that, we need to look for alternative solutions. They could provide automated transformation or mapping features around 10 to 15 independent data objects. We could have a default mark or limit of free usage for standard objects. It will be helpful. Additionally, we can have more integrations with large data volumes as we need a lot of exercises to handle the files in case of complex sites.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"A person with a good IT background and HTML will not have any trouble with Confluent."
"The most valuable feature of Confluent is the wide range of features provided. They're leading the market in this category."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"It is also good for knowledge base management."
"Implementing Confluent's schema registry has significantly enhanced our organization's data quality assurance."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"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."
"Their tech support is amazing; they are very good, both on and off-site."
"I find DataLoader's ability to easily integrate with external keys valuable, which is a bit more challenging with DBM."
"he product’s most valuable feature is ease of access."
"DataLoader is cost-effective since it is free."
 

Cons

"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"Confluent has a good monitoring tool, but it's not customizable."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The product should integrate tools for incorporating diagrams like Lucidchart. It also needs to improve its formatting features. We also faced issues while granting permissions."
"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
"We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"Dataloader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions. Additionally, at times it can be slow, and when integrating DBM, we find it more complex than Dataloader."
"We need help with large data migrations. It only works well for a few thousand records or less than a million records."
"DataLoader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 highly priced."
"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."
"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"You have to pay additional for one or two features."
"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 product is inexpensive and economical."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
847,772 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
5%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 am not very impressed by Confluent. We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team. The lack of easy access to the Confluent support team is also a...
What do you like most about Dataloader.io?
he product’s most valuable feature is ease of access.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Dataloader.io?
Dataloader.io is cost-effective, particularly since it is free.
What needs improvement with Dataloader.io?
DataLoader has limitations, including constraints with file sizes and transactions. Additionally, at times it can be slow, and when integrating DBM, we find it more complex than DataLoader.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
UCSF, Box, CareFusion, Unilever, Hershey's
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. Dataloader.io and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,772 professionals have used our research since 2012.