Cost to Build a Data Streaming Platform: TCO, Risks, and Alternatives

For many organizations, the decision to adopt a data streaming architecture is a strategic imperative—critical for driving everything from instant personalization to global fraud detection. The question is no longer if they should stream, but how. This leads directly to a critical, often underestimated, financial calculation: the cost to build a data streaming platform (DSP) in-house versus the cost of subscribing to a managed service.

Let’s explore key considerations in the "build vs. buy" equation for DSPs so your organization can make the right decision for your needs for control, flexibility, enterprise-grade security, and business value.

Get started with Confluent Cloud to see the capabilities of a complete, enterprise-grade DSP in action, powered by a serverless, cloud-native Kafka engine.

A Guide for Architects & Executives Evaluating the Cost & ROI of Data Streaming

A DSP is a comprehensive, integrated system that handles the entire lifecycle of data in motion—from ingestion and storage to processing and delivery—using data streaming at its core, primarily with Apache Kafka®. Organizations frequently underestimate the complexity and total operational burden of operationalizing Kafka for enterprise, mission-critical use cases, which quietly transforms what appears to be a "free" open source solution into a multi-million dollar annual expenditure. 

In reality, the “free” software extracts a steep price from your business: it consumes your engineering team’s focus. Your engineering talent’s limited time and resources is often locked into endless operational overhead and platform development—cluster maintenance, software upgrades & patches, feature & connector building, and more—rather than focusing on delivering competitive new features.

To be clear, for all but the most unique, large-scale, and mature organizations, the total cost of ownership (TCO) for a production-grade Kafka platform far exceeds that of modern managed solutions. In fact, one vendor determined that building an in-house real-time data platform would be 8 times more expensive to build and 2.6 times more expensive to maintain for capital markets firms. Understanding the true TCO—the hidden price of a DIY DSP—is the first step in making the right strategic decision.

What Are the Core Cost Drivers of a Self-Built DSP?

Building a DSP in-house comes with significant hidden costs. In order for the platform to , bridge the operational-analytical divide, and power real-time intelligence, it’s not enough to make Kafka scalable and build connectors for your existing data stack. You also need to add sufficient governance tooling, stream processing capabilities, and frameworks to integrate with ML models and AI applications.

When deciding to build your DSP, cost drivers for these core components must be considered:

• Infrastructure: Cloud compute, storage, and networking (often over-provisioned to guarantee uptime and handle peak loads)

• Core Technology: Operation of Kafka brokers, the control plane (ZooKeeper or KRaft), and stream processors (Flink clusters)

• Custom Development: Building, testing, and maintaining custom connectors, security layers, and integration tools to fit enterprise systems.

• Skilled Human Capital: The largest, most complex cost: hiring, training, and retaining a dedicated team of Kafka, DevOps, and SRE experts for 24/7 cluster management. (Rough Annual TCO per FTE Team: $300k - $500k+ for 24/7 coverage.)

• Observability Stack: Licensing and management of third-party tools for 24/7 monitoring, logging, and alert-tuning to meet performance Service Level Agreements (SLAs).

What Are the Hidden, Ongoing Costs of Self-Managing Your DSP?

The hidden costs of building a DSP accumulate over time, primarily in the form of human effort, risk, and lost productivity. These operational and opportunity costs are the reasons the TCO of a self-managed solution can quickly spiral. Let’s walk through some hypothetical scenarios that are all too common with in-house DSP and what costs are incurred with each.

Maintenance, Patching and Upgrades

The Risk: Kafka upgrades are not simple "click-to-update" events. They often require complex rolling restarts and protocol version matching.

The "Frozen" Logistics Platform: A logistics company falls three versions behind on their self-managed Kafka cluster because a previous upgrade attempt caused a 4-hour outage. Fearful of disrupting operations, they froze the infrastructure.

The Cost: When a critical security vulnerability (CVE) is announced, the data platform team is forced to perform an emergency multi-version jump. The rushed upgrade fails, resulting in 12 hours of downtime and the loss of real-time tracking data for 50,000 shipments.

Downtime Risks and Recovery

The Risk: In a DIY environment, disaster recovery is often a manual runbook that hasn't been tested until a crisis occurs.

The Black Friday eCommerce Crash: During peak holiday traffic, a major retailer loses a single Zookeeper node. Because their failover scripts are custom-written and brittle, the cluster entered a "split-brain" scenario (where two parts of the system think they are the leader).

The Cost: The checkout service is offline for 45 minutes. The estimated revenue loss is $1.2 million, not including the long-term brand damage caused by frustrated customers venting on social media.

Scaling Overhead (Partition and Broker Management)

The Risk: Scaling isn't instant. Adding brokers requires rebalancing data partitions, which consumes network bandwidth and slows down producers.

The Viral Gaming Launch: A mobile gaming studio sees a 10x spike in traffic during a new launch. While they had budget for more servers, the physical act of adding brokers and rebalancing data partitions saturated their network.

The Cost: The "rebalance storm" increased latency from 20ms to 2000ms. The game became unplayable for real-time users, leading to a 30% churn rate among new installs within the first 24 hours. The infrastructure couldn't scale as fast as the user base.

Compliance and Security Audits

The Risk: Open source tools rarely come with enterprise-grade governance (e.g., RBAC, audit logs, encryption, schema manaement) out of the box. You have to build it.

Case Study—The Fintech Audit Failure: A fintech startup attempts to secure their DIY cluster using basic SSL and simple access control lists (ACLs). During a SOC2 audit, they fail to demonstrate granular lineage (who accessed exactly which data topic and when).

The Cost: To pass the audit and avoid regulatory fines, the entire engineering team (6 senior engineers) has to drop all product roadmap work for six weeks to build a custom governance layer. The delay causes them to miss a critical partnership deadline.

Build vs. Buy: A Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) Comparison

When evaluating the cost of self-management versus a fully managed platform, a true TCO assessment must weigh people, process, and risk against pure infrastructure spend.

Table: Data Streaming Platform Build vs Buy Cost Comparison

Managed services redefine this model by trading high capital and operational expenditures for lower, usage-based subscription costs. By running Kafka in the cloud, engineering teams eliminate the operational drag and resource waste of manual cluster management.

How to Lower Kafka TCO if You Build In-House

If your organization still chooses an in-house build, then you can take several steps to significantly mitigate operational overhead and risk through focused investments in automation and governance.

1. Invest in Infrastructure-as-Code (IaC): Automate the provisioning and scaling of brokers, topic creation, and security layers using tools like Terraform to reduce manual engineering effort and human error.

2. Standardize on Open Source: Prioritize reusing well-maintained, battle-tested open-source components for ancillary services like monitoring and schema registry, rather than building custom tools from scratch.

3. Optimize Team Structure: Implement clear separation of duties where a central platform team manages the core cluster, and application teams focus only on their specific data pipelines.

4. Implement Robust Data Governance: Enforce strict data retention policies and clean up unused topics immediately to prevent unnecessary storage and compute costs from accumulating.

5. Enable Developer Self-Service: Create internal tooling and runbooks to allow developers to provision their own topics and access controls, reducing dependency on the central platform team.

Real-World Cost Example: Verifiable Savings from a Managed DSP

Enterprises across all industries prove that adopting a managed DSP results in verifiable, long-term savings. By shifting the operational burden to a cloud service, businesses unlock both direct and opportunity-based cost reductions.

One major financial services firm, for instance, reported reducing its overall operational cost for data infrastructure by over 40% after migrating from a self-managed platform.

The firm achieved this by:

• Eliminating the need for a full-time dedicated SRE team for cluster maintenance.

• Moving from over-provisioned infrastructure to a usage-based, autoscaling model.

• Accelerating time-to-market for new projects due to immediate access to pre-built, managed connectors and a 99.99% uptime SLA.

Choosing a managed platform allows organizations to free up valuable engineering resources from maintaining, operating, and building critical features around Kafka and focus on innovation instead.

Is a Managed DSP Right for Your Organization?

While in-house development offers maximum control, it carries a high burden of operational complexity and systemic risk. The true cost to build a DSP extends far beyond operating “free” open source source—it lies the sum of raw infrastructure spend plus the steep, ongoing hidden costs of technical talent, scaling overhead, and business risk from downtime. 

A managed DSP can shift this entire operational burden, aligning your expenditure directly with business value and ensuring more reliable, scalable performance. Ready to see how Confluent delivers a significantly lower TCO and faster time-to-market for thousands of organizations? Take the next step.

• Estimate your Kafka savings on Confluent with our calculator

• Sign up for Confluent Cloud to put its DSP capabilities to the test

• Download this ebook to learn which capabilities your org needs

Cost to Build a DSP – FAQs

How much does it cost to build a DSP?

The initial cost for deploying Kafka is low, but the full TCO for building a production-grade, self-managed DSP can range from tens of thousands to over a million dollars annually. These ongoing expenses are primarily driven by the cost of the dedicated engineering team required for its operation and maintenance. There’s also a significant initial investment of time and resources that has to go into supplementing the core data streaming engine with essential integration, processing, and governance capabilities, as well as developer tooling.

What are the hidden costs of a DSP?

Hidden costs include the engineering hours spent on maintenance, patching, and manual scaling; the business risk/cost associated with downtime and SLA breaches; and the opportunity cost of engineers focusing on platform operation instead of product innovation.

When should you buy instead of build? When does it make sense to build a DSP?

You should "buy" a managed DSP when:

• Your core business is not running large-scale distributed systems.

• You require high availability and predictable scaling without a massive dedicated SRE team.

• You need to accelerate time-to-market for applications by using a robust, pre-built ecosystem of connectors and governance tools.

Building a DSP makes sense for "streaming-first" companies where the platform itself is a primary competitive advantage, not just a utility. For example, if your organization moves petabytes of data daily, your data doesn't use web protocols (e.g., JSON, Avro, Protobuf), or your mission-critical Kafka use cases have highly unique requirements that an externally-built DSP can’t support, the costs involved may make sense when weighed against these needs.

Apache®, Apache Kafka®, Kafka®, and the Kafka logo are registered trademarks of the Apache Software Foundation in the United States and/or other countries. No endorsement by the Apache Software Foundation is implied by using these marks. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.