We performed a comparison between AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and Azure Site Recovery based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We went from an organization with minimal to no disaster recovery. I was able to spin up the disaster recovery environment with AWS rather quickly and meet business requirements."
"It's on the cheaper side and not too expensive for users."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."
"The most valuable aspect of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is its instant block replication feature. This allows us to perform live block verification and eliminates the need to concern ourselves with recovery point objectives. This capability is particularly advantageous for critical workloads."
"The initial setup is really straightforward."
"For regular backup and restore solutions, this product is fine."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution."
"The setup is pretty straightforward."
"They're moving a lot of their workload to cloud and aiming for a seamlessly integrated product."
"What I love about Azure Site Recovery is its simplicity for basic configurations."
"Azure Site Recovery's automated file synchronization was a game-changer in managing legacy systems."
"Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"The documentation is good, and it can be integrated with other products."
"Azure Site Recovery allows my company to save around 30 percent of the time on every VM that we need to back up and restore."
"What I like best about Azure Site Recovery is that it's easier to use because my organization already has Azure as an Active Directory solution."
"Azure Site Recovery helps to save costs."
"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening. If there is an issue, I would like to know what the problem is. Right now, we have to depend on the support of the vendor to check and let us know, because we don't have access to a lot of logging information."
"I would like to see better support for creating and working with archives."
"I have not seen any areas that need improvement at this time."
"The bandwidth is a constant upload communication to the AWS DR environment, so if you do not have the proper bandwidth, it will definitely eat up your internet line."
"The solution's network setup and a lot of the control tower setup could be improved."
"Sometimes a server will get a bit behind. "
"The failback could be improved. It should be more intuitive."
"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."
"I would like to see more security features."
"We need to be able to move the virtual servers and not build and then port them across. They need to improve the hypervisor."
"I conveyed the feedback to the agent, suggesting an increase in the agent count in our VNS in the USA. I also addressed notification concerns, as some issues didn't trigger alerts during a recent call."
"It is for site-to-site replication. When something goes wrong on your site, you only get 15 minutes before it also goes wrong on your replicated site. There should be some way to be able to say that we want to restore it, but we want to restore it to the version from yesterday. It should support versioning. I would also like to see real-time scanning for advanced threat protection, more straightforward billing, and quicker turnaround on the tech support."
"The solution needs to improve replication and failover processes. We are still looking for improvements in the cost baseline."
"In the newest version of Azure Site Recovery, the configuration was a little more complex, so this is an area for improvement."
"Site Recovery's scalability could be improved."
"One area for improvement with Azure is helping customers predict usage more accurately."
More AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is ranked 22nd in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software with 11 reviews while Azure Site Recovery is ranked 1st in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 19 reviews. AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is rated 7.4, while Azure Site Recovery is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery writes "Free, easy to use, and offers good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Azure Site Recovery writes "Useful for restoration purposes that ensures that the users get to save a lot of time". AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is most compared with AWS Backup, Oracle Data Guard, VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery, Zerto and Veeam Backup & Replication, whereas Azure Site Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, VMware SRM, Commvault Cloud and VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery. See our AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. Azure Site Recovery report.
See our list of best Disaster Recovery (DR) Software vendors.
We monitor all Disaster Recovery (DR) Software 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.
