TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Apache Flink

    Score9 out of 10
    N/AApache Flink is a framework and distributed processing engine for stateful computations over unbounded and bounded data streams. Flink has been designed to run in all common cluster environments, perform computations at in-memory speed and at any scale. And FlinkCEP is the Complex Event Processing (CEP) library implemented on top of Flink. Users can detect event patterns in streams of events.N/A

    Confluent

    Score9.9 out of 10
    N/AConfluent Cloud is a cloud-native service for Apache Kafka used to connect and process data in real time with a fully managed data streaming platform. Confluent Platform is the self-managed version.

    $385

    per month

    Pricing
    Apache FlinkConfluent
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    Basic
    $0
    Standard
    Starting at ~$385
    per month
    Enterprise
    Starting at ~$1,150
    per month
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Apache FlinkConfluent
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoYes
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details—Confluent monthly bills are based upon resource consumption, i.e., you are only charged for the resources you use when you actually use them: Stream: Kafka clusters are billed for eCKUs/CKUs ($/hour), networking ($/GB), and storage ($/GB-hour). Connect: Use of connectors is billed based on throughput ($/GB) and a task base price ($/task/hour). Process: Use of stream processing with Confluent Cloud for Apache Flink is calculated based on CFUs ($/minute). Govern: Use of Stream Governance is billed based on environment ($/hour). Confluent storage and throughput is calculated in binary gigabytes (GB), where 1 GB is 2^30 bytes. This unit of measurement is also known as a gibibyte (GiB). Please also note that all prices are stated in United States Dollars unless specifically stated otherwise. All billing computations are conducted in Coordinated Universal Time (UTC).
    More Pricing Information
    Features
    Apache FlinkConfluent
    Streaming Analytics
    Comparison of Streaming Analytics features of Apache Flink and Confluent
    Feature
    Apache Flink
    8.7
    1 Ratings
    8% above category average
    Confluent
    9.1
    2 Ratings
    13% above category average
    Real-Time Data Analysis10.01 Ratings10.02 Ratings
    Data Ingestion from Multiple Data Sources7.01 Ratings10.02 Ratings
    Low Latency10.01 Ratings9.02 Ratings
    Data wrangling and preparation6.01 Ratings00 Ratings
    Linear Scale-Out9.01 Ratings9.02 Ratings
    Data Enrichment10.01 Ratings10.01 Ratings
    Visualization Dashboards00 Ratings8.02 Ratings
    Integrated Development Tools00 Ratings8.02 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Apache FlinkConfluent
    Small Businesses
    Amazon Kinesis
    Score9.7 out of 10
    Amazon Kinesis
    Score9.7 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    Confluent
    Score9.9 out of 10
    No answers on this topic
    Enterprises
    Spotfire Streaming
    Score6.6 out of 10
    Spotfire Streaming
    Score6.6 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Apache FlinkConfluent
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    10.0
    (2 ratings)
    Support Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Apache FlinkConfluent
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Apache
    In well-suited scenarios, I would recommend using Apache Flink when you need to perform real-time analytics on streaming data, such as monitoring user activities, analyzing IoT device data, or processing financial transactions in real-time. It is also a good choice in scenarios where fault tolerance and consistency are crucial. I would not recommend it for simple batch processing pipelines or for teams that aren't experienced, as it might be overkill, and the steep learning curve may not justify the investment.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Confluent
    If you have a need to stream data, real time or segmented structured data then Confluent is a great platform to do so with. You won't run into packet transfer size limitations that other platforms have. Flexibility in on-prem, cloud, and managed cloud offerings makes it very flexible no matter how you choose to implement.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Apache
    • Low latency Stream Processing, enabling real-time analytics
    • Scalability, due its great parallel capabilities
    • Stateful Processing, providing several built-in fault tolerance systems
    • Flexibility, supporting both batch and stream processing
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Confluent
    • Products work great.
    • Training is available.
    • Customer support is good.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Apache
    • Python/SQL API, since both are relatively new, still misses a few features in comparison with the Java/Scala option
    • Steep Learning Curve, it's documentation could be improved to something more user-friendly, and it could also discuss more theoretical concepts than just coding
    • Community smaller than other frameworks
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Confluent
    • Cloud based Azure platform features for Confluent lacks behind AWS And GCP
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Apache
    No answers on this topic
    Confluent
    The support from the Confluent platform is great and satisfying. We have been working with Confluent for more than a year now. They sent out resident architects to help us set up Confluent cluster on our cloud and help us troubleshoot problems we have encountered. Overall, it has been a great experience working with the Confluent Platform.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Apache
    Apache Spark is more user-friendly and features higher-level APIs. However, it was initially built for batch processing and only more recently gained streaming capabilities. In contrast, Apache Flink processes streaming data natively. Therefore, in terms of low latency and fault tolerance, Apache Flink takes the lead. However, Spark has a larger community and a decidedly lower learning curve.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Confluent
    For our use case it was very important that the technology we were working with fit into our Azure architecture, and met our data processing size requirements to stream data within certain SLAs. Confluent more than met our performance requirements and compared to the others scale options and cost to run it was more than financially viable as a platform solution to our global operations.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Apache
    • Allowed for real-time data recovery, adding significant value to the busines
    • Enabled us to create new internal tools that we couldn't find in the market, becoming a strategic asset for the business
    • Enhanced the overall technical capability of the team
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Confluent
    • It enables us to develop event driven application.
    • It increases our ability to handle streaming data.
    • It reduces latency of communication.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots