We performed a comparison between Confluent and MuleSoft Composer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Data Integration solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."One of the best features of Confluent is that it's very easy to search and have a live status with Jira."
"The most valuable is its capability to enhance the documentation process, particularly when creating software documentation."
"Confluence's greatest asset is its user-friendly interface, coupled with its remarkable ability to seamlessly integrate with a vast range of other solutions."
"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 solution can handle a high volume of data because it works and scales well."
"The monitoring module is impressive."
"The documentation process is fast with the tool."
"The design of the product is extremely well built and it is highly configurable."
"The product is easy to use. You don't need programming skills to use it."
"The advantage of using MuleSoft as part as the Salesforce ecosystem is that anything new they build is guaranteed to work with the new features that are coming from the other side."
"The way Composer organizes and manages integration processes is most beneficial. We can easily monitor what's running and what isn't and troubleshoot any data integration issues."
"The prebuilt connectors have saved our customers a lot of time and money."
"Confluent has a good monitoring tool, but it's not customizable."
"In Confluent, there could be a few more VPN options."
"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."
"Confluent's price needs improvement."
"It could be improved by including a feature that automatically creates a new topic and puts failed messages."
"It requires some application specific connectors which are lacking. This needs to be added."
"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."
"There is no local support team in Saudi Arabia."
"The technical support team's response time must be improved."
"This solution could be improved by offering more integrations with other platforms."
"One additional feature they could add might be something like regional prices. Since we're based in Brazil, we pay in dollars but earn in Brazilian Real."
"MuleSoft Composer needs to improve its interface and scalability."
Confluent is ranked 4th in Streaming Analytics with 21 reviews while MuleSoft Composer is ranked 13th in Cloud Data Integration with 4 reviews. Confluent is rated 8.4, while MuleSoft Composer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Confluent writes "Has good technical support services and a valuable feature for real-time data streaming ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MuleSoft Composer writes "Handles a wide variety of data sources and efficiently organizes and manages integration processes". Confluent is most compared with Amazon MSK, Amazon Kinesis, Databricks, AWS Glue and Oracle GoldenGate, whereas MuleSoft Composer is most compared with Mule Anypoint Platform, Workato, Celigo Integration Platform, Microsoft Azure Logic Apps and Zapier. See our Confluent vs. MuleSoft Composer report.
See our list of best Cloud Data Integration vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Data Integration reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.