No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Confluent vs Palantir Foundry 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
6.3
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (9th)
Palantir Foundry
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (5th), IT Operations Analytics (5th), Supply Chain Analytics (1st), Cloud Data Integration (4th), Data Migration Appliances (2nd), Data Management Platforms (DMP) (1st), Data and Analytics Service Providers (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
reviewer2846265 - PeerSpot reviewer
PALANTIR DATA ENGINEER at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Unified healthcare pipelines have improved data trust and accelerated operational decisions
One challenge regarding how Palantir Foundry can be improved is the learning curve. Foundry has a very broad ecosystem with Ontology, Pipeline Builder, Code Repositories, and AI integrations. For new engineers or business users onboarding, it can take time, especially if they are coming from more traditional data platforms. Better documentation, simplified onboarding paths, and more beginner-friendly examples would help accelerate adoption. Another area is debugging complexity. While lineage and monitoring are strong features, troubleshooting deeply interconnected pipelines can still become difficult in a large enterprise environment. Sometimes error logs and pipeline failure messages could be more descriptive or developer-friendly, especially for distributed PySpark jobs. Another pain point is customization limitations in certain UI-driven components. While low-code tools are great for rapid development, highly customized workflows sometimes still require engineering workarounds or deeper technical implementation. The platform is extremely capable, but improvements around usability, debugging experience, DevOps flexibility, and ecosystem openness would make it even more effective for enterprise engineering teams.

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 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."
"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."
"The client APIs are the most valuable feature."
"The solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"With Confluent Cloud we no longer need to handle the infrastructure and the plumbing, which is a concern for Confluent. The other advantage is that all portfolios have access to the data that is being shared."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"Palantir Foundry makes data reporting easier and reduces time in data gathering and reporting, where what would usually take about a day and a half of data gathering and reporting I have ultimately reduced to about 20 minutes."
"Encapsulates all the components without the requirement to integrate or check compatibility."
"It's scalable."
"Live video sessions enhance the available documentation and allow you to ask questions directly."
"Palantir Foundry gives me a unified view of AI and my engineering space while I have been doing a lot of data engineering in a couple of technologies, bringing that data together and stitching them and putting together AI, enabling AI use cases, which makes me see a holistic view of data coming from various platforms."
"I rate Palantir Foundry a ten out of ten."
"The virtualization tool is useful."
"We believe that the client has improved their efficiency compared to their previous working model; they have more clarity and, above all, more control over the data."
 

Cons

"It could be more user-friendly and centralized. A way to reduce redundancy would be helpful."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"The formatting aspect within the page can be improved and more powerful."
"The pricing was high for our needs. We should not have to pay for features we do not use."
"It could have more integration with different platforms."
"Recently, there has been a lot of buzz about Confluent charging high fees while not offering features that match those of other tools."
"Confluent has fallen behind in being the tool of the industry. It's taking second place to things such as Word and SharePoint and other office tools that are more dynamic and flexible than 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."
"The solution’s data security could be improved."
"When we were using ETL with Palantir Foundry, we found we had less freedom compared to Cloudera, where we had more liberty in using various configuration parameters of Spark, allowing us to tune our jobs accordingly."
"Cost of this solution is quite high."
"One way Palantir Foundry can be improved is by addressing issues with back-end changes. There were cases where changes made to Palantir Foundry would cause failures across all platforms."
"There is not a wide user base for the solution's online documentation so it is sometimes difficult to find answers."
"There are some limitations when dealing with a large-scale project."
"Regarding documentation, I find that when I face issues, the outdated documentation is not helpful; for example, while trying to create a webhook to fetch SharePoint metadata, I found available resources lacking relevance, needing significant updates to assist users properly."
"For example, exporting data from Palantir Foundry is very difficult and has many limitations."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Confluent has a yearly license, which is a bit high because it's on a per-user basis."
"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 is an expensive solution."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"Confluent is highly priced."
"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."
"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."
"The solution’s pricing is high."
"It's expensive."
"Palantir Foundry has different pricing models that can be negotiated."
"Palantir Foundry is an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
896,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
7%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise36
 

Questions from the Community

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 ...
What is your primary use case for Confluent?
The main use cases for Confluent are log aggregation and streaming. I'm familiar with Confluent stream processing with KSQL. KSQL helps in terms of data analytics strategies because if we are the d...
What needs improvement with Palantir Foundry?
Regarding points for improvement for Palantir Foundry, I see that they are improving day by day. In the last one to two years, I have seen many improvements compared to the two years that I have wo...
What is your primary use case for Palantir Foundry?
There are several use cases that we are working on with Palantir Foundry. The first thing is for data model creation for all our data engineering pipelines. That is one use case. Palantir Foundry a...
What advice do you have for others considering Palantir Foundry?
The visualization part in Palantir Foundry works for me at least if I want to see how the data is structured and for an initial analysis, but I would say it is not as matured as Power BI or Tableau...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Priceline.com, Nordea, Target, RBC, Tivo, Capital One, Chartboost
Merck KGaA, Airbus, Ferrari,United States Intelligence Community, United States Department of Defense
Find out what your peers are saying about Confluent vs. Palantir Foundry and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
896,692 professionals have used our research since 2012.