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

Confluent vs Oracle GoldenGate 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)
Oracle GoldenGate
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Confluent and Oracle GoldenGate 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.
Oracle GoldenGate, on the other hand, focuses on Data Integration, holds 3.6% mindshare, down 3.7% 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.
ShahidNadeem - PeerSpot reviewer
Handles migrations well and has reduced our downtime
For small databases that are less than a terabyte, GoldenGate handles the migration well. You don't need much input so long as the processes don't upend. As soon as there's a problem, then, obviously, you need to diagnose it. It all depends on the scenario, on the size of the databases, whether you're doing schema replication, or table replication. We normally do the whole database, taking everything across. Finally, because this is an Oracle product, there is support available 24/7.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"I would rate the scalability of the solution at eight out of ten. We have 20 people who use Confluent in our organization now, and we hope to increase usage in the future."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"We ensure seamless management of Kafka through Confluent, allowing all of our Kafka activities to be handled by a third party."
"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
"One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"You can put data together from a few databases into one database or the other way, from one database into several. It transforms data in real-time."
"It moves the data as you set it up, and it works. I am also very impressed with its stability and scalability. It is not super feature-rich, but the new releases have more functionality. It recently had more native integrations with Oracle Database. If you are using it against an Oracle database, it has a lot more functionality."
"It is quite scalable."
"Oracle GoldenGate is beneficial for data replication and ensures secure data transport."
"I am impressed with the tool's possibility of integrating different systems in a unified place."
"One feature that stands out for me is the data center capability."
"The product's microservice architecture is scalable."
"The most valuable features of Oracle GoldenGate are the schema application and performance."
 

Cons

"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."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"It could be more user-friendly and centralized. A way to reduce redundancy would be helpful."
"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"We continuously face issues, such as Kafka being down and slow responses from the support team."
"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."
"The solution, in general, should be easier to use, with less need to perform workarounds within the system."
"Oracle GoldenGate's installation is not user-friendly, we had to read a lot of documentation for the setup and configuration."
"GoldenGate is expensive. It's costly because this solution is unique in our market. The GoldenGate Cloud Service is cheaper than the on-premise solution."
"The solution needs to improve its latency, monitoring and support."
"A clean and user-friendly graphical interface based on common design principles would be beneficial."
"The problem with GoldenGate is it is very complex to use. You need heavyweight skills to use it."
"Lacks the ability to become a full-scale ETL tool."
"Microservices Architecture is not user-friendly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"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."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"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 expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"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."
"The return on investment would make it a worthwhile deal."
"The tool needs to improve its pricing."
"We do like the price of this solution."
"The licensing model should be improved to be more cost-effective for the end users."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for Oracle GoldenGate, which is very expensive."
"Oracle GoldenGate's license can be expensive compared to other solutions like Qlik Replicate or SAP Replicate."
"We have an enterprise license for it. It might be for three years or so. I'm not aware of any additional costs to the standard licensing fee."
"The solution would be costly for a small organization."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Streaming Analytics solutions are best for your needs.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user99375 - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 31, 2014
Oracle GoldenGate vs. Oracle Active Dataguard
As an Oracle DBA, while working upon high availability of your database you may stumble upon various Oracle strategic capabilities that fall into categories of Oracle Replication. Oracle provides various technologies for replication like GoldenGate, streams, and Active Dataguard. Replication…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 Oracle GoldenGate?
The product is reliable for data integrity.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Oracle GoldenGate?
The pricing of Oracle GoldenGate is quite high. However, its cost-effectiveness stems from its unique features that are not commonly available in other products. Still, it is not cheap, and I would...
What needs improvement with Oracle GoldenGate?
There is room for improvement in Oracle GoldenGate's pricing, which is a bit high. Additionally, the configuration process could be made simpler. Although it serves well, these aspects could be imp...
 

Also Known As

No data available
GoldenGate
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Japan Exchange Group, Daewoo E&C, Herbalife, Starwood Hotels & Resorts, Canon, Turk Telekom
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. Oracle GoldenGate and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,862 professionals have used our research since 2012.