Grasshopper vs. IBM Confluent
| Product | Rating | Most Used By | Product Summary | Starting Price |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Grasshopper | Score6.1 out of 10 | N/A | Grasshopper is an IP telephony business communication solution that provides companies with a toll-free or local phone number. It has both desktop and mobile applications and includes features such as custom greeting recording, call forwarding, call transfer, call reporting, and voicemail. | $18 per month for a single user |
IBM Confluent | Score9.1 out of 10 | N/A | IBM Confluent helps enterprises stream, connect, process, govern and serve real-time data across hybrid environments. | $385 per month |
| Grasshopper | IBM Confluent | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Editions & Modules |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| Offerings |
| |||||||||||||||
| Entry-level Setup Fee | No setup fee | No setup fee | ||||||||||||||
| Additional Details | 20% discount available for annual pricing. | Confluent monthly bills are based upon resource consumption, i.e., you are only charged for the resources you use when you actually use them: Stream: Kafka clusters are billed for eCKUs/CKUs ($/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 | ||||||||||||||||
| Grasshopper | IBM Confluent | |
|---|---|---|
| Considered Both Products | No answer on this topic | No answer on this topic |
| Key User Insights | ||
| Would buy again | ||
100% Would buy again 46 Answers | No answers on this topic | |
| Delivers good value for the price | ||
98% Delivers good value for the price 45 Answers | No answers on this topic | |
| Happy with the feature set | ||
93% Happy with the feature set 43 Answers | No answers on this topic | |
| Lived up to sales and marketing promises | ||
100% Lived up to sales and marketing promises 42 Answers | No answers on this topic | |
| Implementation went as expected | ||
100% Implementation went as expected 46 Answers | No answers on this topic | |
| Grasshopper | IBM Confluent | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cloud PBX |
| |||||||||||||||||||
| Call Management |
| |||||||||||||||||||
| VoIP system collaboration |
| |||||||||||||||||||
| Mobile apps |
| |||||||||||||||||||
| Grasshopper | IBM Confluent | |
|---|---|---|
| Small Businesses | CallFire Score9.7 out of 10 | Amazon SNS Score8.7 out of 10 |
| Medium-sized Companies | Fuze Score8.2 out of 10 | Amazon SNS Score8.7 out of 10 |
| Enterprises | Cisco Unified Communications Manager (Call Manager) Score8.3 out of 10 | Google Cloud Pub/Sub Score8.8 out of 10 |
| All Alternatives | View all alternatives | View all alternatives |
| Grasshopper | IBM Confluent | |
|---|---|---|
| Likelihood to Recommend | 7.8 | 10.0 |
| Usability | 6.0 | - |
| Support Rating | 9.0 | 10.0 |
| Grasshopper | IBM Confluent | |
|---|---|---|
| Likelihood to Recommend |
|
|
| Pros |
|
|
| Cons |
|
|
| Usability |
| No answers on this topic |
| Support Rating |
|
|
| Alternatives Considered |
|
|
| Return on Investment |
|
|
| ScreenShots |





