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

Confluent vs Palantir Foundry comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
6.4
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Data Integration (2nd), IT Operations Analytics (4th), 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

"We mostly use the solution's message queues and event-driven architecture."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"Our main goal is to validate whether we can build a scalable and cost-efficient way to replicate data from these various sources."
"To date, we have seen improvements in performance and scalability, so we recommend this solution."
"The biggest benefit of Confluent as a tool is that it is a distributed platform that provides more durability and stability."
"Kafka Connect framework is valuable for connecting to the various source systems where code doesn't need to be written."
"Live video sessions enhance the available documentation and allow you to ask questions directly."
"Palantir Foundry has proven to be a great tool in terms of scalability for me, especially compared to Power BI, which felt inadequate, as its scalability depends on the Slate application and I am only limited by my imagination."
"The data lineage is great."
"It is easy to map out a workflow and run trigger-based scripts without having to deploy to another server."
"The best features Palantir Foundry offers include the semantic layer providing schema-level understanding about the data, low-code and no-code integration for ease without coding in the pipeline builder, AI Assist for assistance, Ontology for digital twin relationships, branching in pipeline level and Foundry branching for better management, zero-copy architecture for querying without massive data, data lineage for troubleshooting, and security changes that can be made in the pipeline builder and Ontology Workshop."
"It's scalable."
"From my experience, one of the best features Palantir Foundry offers is that you have everything in one ecosystem."
"The scalability of Palantir Foundry is the part that I love the most."
 

Cons

"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."
"They should remove Zookeeper because of security issues."
"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."
"Areas for improvement include implementing multi-storage support to differentiate between database stores based on data age and optimizing storage costs."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"The pricing model should include the ability to pick features and be charged for them only."
"Confluent is expensive, I would prefer, Apache Kafka over Confluent because of the high cost of maintenance."
"One area we've identified that could be improved is the governance and access control to the Kafka topics. We've found some limitations, like a threshold of 10,000 rules per cluster, that make it challenging to manage access at scale if we have many different data sources."
"With Palantir Foundry, it is a part of the user tools that they provide. Their AI Assist that they use is something I have found that sometimes I get better results for when I do need help and aid."
"The frontend capabilities of Palantir Foundry could be improved."
"Palantir Foundry is very accurate, but I would have doubts about its reliability because there have been instances in my current job where we experience untimely application downtime, which has impacted the business significantly, so I think reliability needs improvement."
"I rate Palantir Foundry five out of 10. I'm ambivalent."
"Some error messages can be very cryptic."
"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."
"The workflow could be improved."
"It requires a lot of manual work and is very time-consuming to get to a functional point."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Confluent is highly priced."
"Confluent is an expensive solution."
"It comes with a high cost."
"The solution is cheaper than other products."
"Confluent is an expensive solution as we went for a three contract and it was very costly for us."
"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."
"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."
"Palantir Foundry has different pricing models that can be negotiated."
"Palantir Foundry is an expensive solution."
"It's expensive."
"The solution’s pricing is high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Data Integration solutions are best for your needs.
919,088 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Retailer
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Construction Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Government
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 Business11
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise51
 

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?
The Workshop application could be improved because it is not very customizable, but it is still very strong. We also have the React OSK apps, but it does not allow the inbuilt applications such as ...
What is your primary use case for Palantir Foundry?
My main use case for Palantir Foundry is to solve business problems, such as in healthcare. I also worked on a project for a law firm where thousands of PDFs were coming in, and we needed to check ...
What advice do you have for others considering Palantir Foundry?
I believe they should get started by completing all the free certificates, then they could apply to the paid certificates to get a master of Palantir Foundry, solve some real use cases, do examples...
 

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 Amazon Web Services (AWS), Informatica, Palantir and others in Cloud Data Integration. Updated: October 2026.
919,088 professionals have used our research since 2012.