Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon SQS vs Apache Kafka comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 20, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.8
Amazon SQS enhances reliability and productivity by handling user spikes and message integrity while allowing teams to focus elsewhere.
Sentiment score
7.0
Apache Kafka offers substantial returns, especially in high-value applications, with enhanced data buffering, cost savings, and ease of use.
Using Amazon SQS has led to increased productivity and reduced man-hour costs.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.6
Amazon SQS support is inconsistent, but comprehensive documentation helps; larger users receive better service than smaller ones.
Sentiment score
5.8
Apache Kafka's support is community-driven, with varying user experiences and enhanced options available through paid subscriptions and consultants.
They meet their tasks effectively.
There is plenty of community support available online.
The Apache community provides support for the open-source version.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
Amazon SQS efficiently manages scalable message loads, integrating seamlessly with AWS services like SNS and Lambda, despite occasional message duplicates.
Sentiment score
7.8
Apache Kafka is praised for its robust scalability, efficiently handling high data throughput, with some challenges in cluster management.
Amazon SQS is highly scalable, automatically managing itself based on the load.
Customers have not faced issues with user growth or data streaming needs.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
Amazon SQS is praised for stability and reliability, handling loads effectively with minimal downtime compared to other solutions.
Sentiment score
7.7
Apache Kafka is stable and performs well with high data volumes, though some configurations may affect its reliability.
With Amazon SQS, such maintenance is not needed, making it more reliable and secure.
Partitioning helps us distribute all the messages that we receive between all partitions, which helps us to be stable.
Apache Kafka is stable.
 

Room For Improvement

The document highlights the need for better tools, integration, scalability, and security to improve user efficiency and satisfaction.
Enhancing Kafka involves user-friendly UI, improved monitoring, reduced ZooKeeper dependency, better documentation, flexibility, and integration with other platforms.
It would be beneficial if there was a provision to configure and retain messages for longer than a week.
The performance angle is critical, and while it works in milliseconds, the goal is to move towards microseconds.
We are always trying to find the best configs, which is a challenge.
I would appreciate having some kind of UI integrated into Apache Kafka for connecting to it because using code to connect it is basic, but we can use a UI.
 

Setup Cost

Amazon SQS pricing is moderately competitive with initial free requests but can become costly with high usage.
Apache Kafka is free to use, but costs vary for managed services and enterprise solutions, potentially exceeding 100,000 euros annually.
On a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, I would rate the pricing as one.
The open-source version of Apache Kafka results in minimal costs, mainly linked to accessing documentation and limited support.
Its pricing is reasonable.
 

Valuable Features

Amazon SQS provides seamless integration, scalability, reliability, and cost-effectiveness, efficiently managing large-scale data with robust features.
Apache Kafka excels in scalability, real-time streaming, and flexibility, ideal for large data volumes and event-driven architectures.
If there's a failure in the system after consuming a message, SQS's settings ensure the message is not deleted until confirmation.
Apache Kafka is effective when dealing with large volumes of data flowing at high speeds, requiring real-time processing.
It allows the use of data in motion, allowing data to propagate from one source to another while it is in motion.
The impact of Apache Kafka's scalability features on my organization and data processing capabilities depends on how many messages each company wants to receive.
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon SQS
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software (4th)
Apache Kafka
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
88
Ranking in other categories
Streaming Analytics (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

Amazon SQS and Apache Kafka aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Amazon SQS is designed for Message Queue (MQ) Software and holds a mindshare of 8.0%, down 11.1% compared to last year.
Apache Kafka, on the other hand, focuses on Streaming Analytics, holds 3.0% mindshare, up 1.9% since last year.
Message Queue (MQ) Software
Streaming Analytics
 

Featured Reviews

Hari Prakash Pokala - PeerSpot reviewer
Valuable AWS services enhance data analysis yet could benefit from flexible data streams
I am using multiple services such as AWS Lambda, S3, EC2, ECS, and the SNS SQS services, along with QuickSight reports and some of the VPC concepts.  We have an email notification system integrated with Spring Branch. Once a batch job completes, SNS and SQS trigger events, sending notification…
Snehasish Das - PeerSpot reviewer
Data streaming transforms real-time data movement with impressive scalability
I worked with Apache Kafka for customers in the financial industry and OTT platforms. They use Kafka particularly for data streaming. Companies offering movie and entertainment as a service, similar to Netflix, use Kafka Apache Kafka offers unique data streaming. It allows the use of data in…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon SQS?
The retention period for messages could be improved. Currently, messages are retained for four or seven days. It would be beneficial if there was a provision to configure and retain messages for lo...
What is your primary use case for Amazon SQS?
I primarily use Amazon SQS ( /products/amazon-sqs-reviews ) for asynchronous messaging. It is part of our distributed system design, where we use it for asynchronous communication by posting a mess...
What are the differences between Apache Kafka and IBM MQ?
Apache Kafka is open source and can be used for free. It has very good log management and has a way to store the data used for analytics. Apache Kafka is very good if you have a high number of user...
What do you like most about Apache Kafka?
Apache Kafka is an open-source solution that can be used for messaging or event processing.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Kafka?
Its pricing is reasonable. It's not always about cost, but about meeting specific needs.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EMS, NASA, BMW, Capital One
Uber, Netflix, Activision, Spotify, Slack, Pinterest
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon SQS vs. Apache Kafka and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
857,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.
OSZAR »