We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and IBM Disaster Recovery Services based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Disaster Recovery as a Service solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Provides generally good performance, from protection to production to failover to data recovery."
"We use the solution across hospitality and healthcare domains. We use it for custom development. It helps us develop a seamless omnichannel for the healthcare industry."
"Our primary use case is for disaster recovery and business continuity and disaster recovery (BCDR)."
"The most useful thing is that it provides a snapshot of your environment in about 15 minutes. It is stable, and it always works. It is also scalable and easy to set up."
"Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"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."
"They're moving a lot of their workload to cloud and aiming for a seamlessly integrated product."
"We use the tool for business continuity purposes."
"The solution works well for very large organizations. It can scale quite well."
"Disaster Recovery Services is stable."
"One area for improvement with Azure is helping customers predict usage more accurately."
"Azure Site Recovery's deployment is complex. There are a lot of bugs, and it needs to improve stability."
"The immutable backup could be better."
"When it runs, it runs well but when it doesn't run, the solution needs to make it clearer as to why and what the troubleshooting process is. All this would be possible if the error logging was streamlined a bit."
"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."
"I would like to see more security features."
"The solution needs to improve replication and failover processes. We are still looking for improvements in the cost baseline."
"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 infrastructure level of IBM's recovery systems could be improved."
"Disaster Recovery Services could provide better value for money."
More IBM Disaster Recovery Services Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Site Recovery is ranked 1st in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 19 reviews while IBM Disaster Recovery Services is ranked 5th in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 2 reviews. Azure Site Recovery is rated 8.2, while IBM Disaster Recovery Services is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Azure Site Recovery writes "Useful for restoration purposes that ensures that the users get to save a lot of time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Disaster Recovery Services writes "Quite stable with good scalability for large organizations but the recovery system infrastructure could be better". Azure Site Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, VMware SRM, AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and NAKIVO Backup & Replication, whereas IBM Disaster Recovery Services is most compared with Precisely Assure MIMIX and Sungard Disaster Recovery Services. See our Azure Site Recovery vs. IBM Disaster Recovery Services report.
See our list of best Disaster Recovery as a Service vendors.
We monitor all Disaster Recovery as a Service 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.