Confluent vs. MongoDB

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Confluent
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Confluent 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
MongoDB
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
MongoDB is an open source document-oriented database system. It is part of the NoSQL family of database systems. Instead of storing data in tables as is done in a "classical" relational database, MongoDB stores structured data as JSON-like documents with dynamic schemas (MongoDB calls the format BSON), making the integration of data in certain types of applications easier and faster.
$0.10
million reads
Pricing
ConfluentMongoDB
Editions & Modules
Basic
$0
Standard
Starting at ~$385
per month
Enterprise
Starting at ~$1,150
per month
Shared
$0
per month
Serverless
$0.10million reads
million reads
Dedicated
$57
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ConfluentMongoDB
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsConfluent monthly bills are based upon resource consumption, i.e., you are only charged for the resources you use when you actually use them: Stream: Kafka clusters are billed for eCKUs/CKUs ($/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).Fully managed, global cloud database on AWS, Azure, and GCP
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ConfluentMongoDB
Considered Both Products
Confluent
Chose Confluent
We chose to use the Confluent Platform because they provide enterprise-grade customer service support. Whenever we have trouble setting up or using the service, we can create a ticket for them and it will be resolved pretty fast. Kafka is the open-source software that comes …
MongoDB

No answer on this topic

Features
ConfluentMongoDB
Streaming Analytics
Comparison of Streaming Analytics features of Product A and Product B
Confluent
9.1
2 Ratings
13% above category average
MongoDB
-
Ratings
Real-Time Data Analysis10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Visualization Dashboards8.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Data Ingestion from Multiple Data Sources10.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Low Latency9.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Integrated Development Tools8.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Linear Scale-Out9.02 Ratings00 Ratings
Data Enrichment10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
NoSQL Databases
Comparison of NoSQL Databases features of Product A and Product B
Confluent
-
Ratings
MongoDB
10.0
39 Ratings
12% above category average
Performance00 Ratings10.039 Ratings
Availability00 Ratings10.039 Ratings
Concurrency00 Ratings10.039 Ratings
Security00 Ratings10.039 Ratings
Scalability00 Ratings10.039 Ratings
Data model flexibility00 Ratings10.039 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility00 Ratings10.038 Ratings
Best Alternatives
ConfluentMongoDB
Small Businesses
IBM Streams (discontinued)
IBM Streams (discontinued)
Score 9.0 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Tealium Customer Data Hub
Tealium Customer Data Hub
Score 8.5 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.6 out of 10
Enterprises
Spotfire Streaming
Spotfire Streaming
Score 6.9 out of 10
IBM Cloudant
IBM Cloudant
Score 7.6 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ConfluentMongoDB
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(2 ratings)
10.0
(79 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(67 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(15 ratings)
Availability
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
9.6
(13 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.4
(2 ratings)
User Testimonials
ConfluentMongoDB
Likelihood to Recommend
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.
Read full review
MongoDB
If asked by a colleague I would highly recommend MongoDB. MongoDB provides incredible flexibility and is quick and easy to set up. It also provides extensive documentation which is very useful for someone new to the tool. Though I've used it for years and still referenced the docs often. From my experience and the use cases I've worked on, I'd suggest using it anywhere that needs a fast, efficient storage space for non-relational data. If a relational database is needed then another tool would be more apt.
Read full review
Pros
Confluent
  • Products work great.
  • Training is available.
  • Customer support is good.
Read full review
MongoDB
  • Being a JSON language optimizes the response time of a query, you can directly build a query logic from the same service
  • You can install a local, database-based environment rather than the non-relational real-time bases such a firebase does not allow, the local environment is paramount since you can work without relying on the internet.
  • Forming collections in Mango is relatively simple, you do not need to know of query to work with it, since it has a simple graphic environment that allows you to manage databases for those who are not experts in console management.
Read full review
Cons
Confluent
  • Cloud based Azure platform features for Confluent lacks behind AWS And GCP
Read full review
MongoDB
  • An aggregate pipeline can be a bit overwhelming as a newcomer.
  • There's still no real concept of joins with references/foreign keys, although the aggregate framework has a feature that is close.
  • Database management/dev ops can still be time-consuming if rolling your own deployments. (Thankfully there are plenty of providers like Compose or even MongoDB's own Atlas that helps take care of the nitty-gritty.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Confluent
No answers on this topic
MongoDB
I am looking forward to increasing our SaaS subscriptions such that I get to experience global replica sets, working in reads from secondaries, and what not. Can't wait to be able to exploit some of the power that the "Big Boys" use MongoDB for.
Read full review
Usability
Confluent
No answers on this topic
MongoDB
NoSQL database systems such as MongoDB lack graphical interfaces by default and therefore to improve usability it is necessary to install third-party applications to see more visually the schemas and stored documents. In addition, these tools also allow us to visualize the commands to be executed for each operation.
Read full review
Support Rating
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.
Read full review
MongoDB
Finding support from local companies can be difficult. There were times when the local company could not find a solution and we reached a solution by getting support globally. If a good local company is found, it will overcome all your problems with its global support.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Confluent
No answers on this topic
MongoDB
While the setup and configuration of MongoDB is pretty straight forward, having a vendor that performs automatic backups and scales the cluster automatically is very convenient. If you do not have a system administrator or DBA familiar with MongoDB on hand, it's a very good idea to use a 3rd party vendor that specializes in MongoDB hosting. The value is very well worth it over hosting it yourself since the cost is often reasonable among providers.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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.
Read full review
MongoDB
We have [measured] the speed in reading/write operations in high load and finally select the winner = MongoDBWe have [not] too much data but in case there will be 10 [times] more we need Cassandra. Cassandra's storage engine provides constant-time writes no matter how big your data set grows. For analytics, MongoDB provides a custom map/reduce implementation; Cassandra provides native Hadoop support.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Confluent
  • It enables us to develop event driven application.
  • It increases our ability to handle streaming data.
  • It reduces latency of communication.
Read full review
MongoDB
  • Open Source w/ reasonable support costs have a direct, positive impact on the ROI (we moved away from large, monolithic, locked in licensing models)
  • You do have to balance the necessary level of HA & DR with the number of servers required to scale up and scale out. Servers cost money - so DR & HR doesn't come for free (even though it's built into the architecture of MongoDB
Read full review
ScreenShots

MongoDB Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of