We compared Acronis Cyber Protect and N-able Cove Data Protection across several parameters based on our users' reviews. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: In comparing Acronis Cyber Protect to N-able Cove Data Protection, both options are user-friendly and have efficient setup processes. Acronis Cyber Protect stands out for its flexibility and ability to back up a wide range of products, while N-able Cove Data Protection is praised for its ease of use, reliability, and cloud-based data protection. Acronis Cyber Protect offers additional features like antivirus and ransomware protection, while N-able Cove Data Protection has unique capabilities such as backup of MySQL databases. However, Acronis Cyber Protect has more reviews mentioning potential complexities related to pricing structure, licensing, and configuration processes, whereas N-able Cove Data Protection receives more positive feedback regarding customer service and support.
"The performance has been fine so far."
"The solution was easy to install and to deploy."
"Stability is always good. I have used Acronis for 10 years now, if not more. I have never had a problem with availability, etc."
"Our customers can backup to local storage and they can back up or replicate to the cloud."
"The best thing about it is that we can back up pretty much everything we want to. We don't have to have multiple solutions. It can back up any physical or virtual server, including servers in Azure. It can back up SharePoint, OneDrive, and G Suite. Everything we need to back up can be backed up, and that's why we like it."
"The image backup and image restore features have been very beneficial to us."
"For my first experience, it is the best software for backups, especially for a five-system backup."
"It is a very stable solution."
"It's extremely important that Cove provides cloud-based data protection with backup, disaster recovery, and archiving. That is a necessity for my insurance. As an IT company, my insurance would cost more if my backups were not offsite and off-network."
"The most valuables feature is the alerts and monitoring that catches the failed backups."
"The most valuable feature is that it's hands-off. I log in every morning and there are pre-canned filters that I've created to make my life easier. I have something called server status color bars, and that gives me all the servers and, in a nutshell, I can see: if any errors are being reported; when the last backup was; if one is not working, should there be one, and it literally jumps off the page."
"The ease of use and the console are great."
"It's their cloud, it's their storage. I don't have to buy a space on Amazon or Google's cloud and then use their software to push it. That works well for me. This way, I don't have to worry about another option or the opportunity that there might be a credential leak."
"The product is simple to use and manage. The customers have access to verify the backups."
"The ability to back up, restore, and do different types of testing for the preventative maintenance has really increased our importance to these clients because they see the value in how fast we can get them back up and running. We're saving them money in that way."
"We use a neat feature called VDR status, Virtual Disaster Recovery status. It only works on servers... It's automated. Once or twice a month it will virtually mount the backup and provide a screenshot and advise whether or not there have been any errors."
"Their support process can be quite lengthy...This is an area that needs improvement."
"The dashboards for digital operations can be improved."
"The reporting can be improved."
"There are times when the backups are slow. A faster backup would be better."
"Improved support for immutability and Utility AirGAP could be beneficial."
"The product needs to have a simple DR process."
"We would always support better pricing."
"The UI performance can be slow at times, especially when handling operations like checking backup status or initiating a restore. The response time for these actions could be improved."
"We would like to have better reporting."
"A disaster recovery console would be an improvement for the product."
"We don't use the solution’s automated recovery testing because SolarWinds made me cross. When they released it, I went, "Oh, well, that's quite good." Because if you use the system, then it supposedly spins up, and on the portal, it gives you a screenshot of the booted device. So, I phoned up, and I said, "Oh, that's really quite cool. How much is that?" They said, "No, no, no. It's all included in your license." I went, "Okay then," and went and deployed it on about half the fleet. One of the options that our customers have is they can pay us a small amount every month for us to test the recovery just to prove that it's viable, and I thought, "Well, this will do that for us. Nice." Then, in the next invoice, we got a charge for it. While It was not a huge amount, I took offense at the fact that we were told that it would be a no extra cost option that was part of our license, but it turns out that it's chargeable. Therefore, we haven't used it since."
"I have some issues with the agent failing on workstations. I've had to completely uninstall several of them, delete everything, and start over to get them to work."
"For small amounts of data, recovery is easy, but when it's large amounts of data, it takes forever. So, if they can have a service where they put our data on a hard drive and ship it to us as fast as possible, it would be great. Even if there's a fee associated with it, it's fine."
"The reporting feature and functionality need improvement. We would like to see a little bit more detailed reporting that offers more CEO or C-level focused reporting options."
"The one thing they don't are Linux servers, it's Windows only. I understand that directive. I have another product that I use for our Linux servers and stuff, but it would be nice if they had that flexibility on the Linux side. I understand the development and the world is geared towards Windows in 365, I know that's where the clienteles are and the business and the money is."
"The only area that needs improvement is that it is a little bit difficult when you get into virtual machines. The initial deployment of Cove is a little tedious, not for standard machines, but when you get into specialty stuff, like Hyper-V."
Acronis Cyber Protect is ranked 5th in Cloud Backup with 117 reviews while N-able Cove Data Protection is ranked 8th in Cloud Backup with 20 reviews. Acronis Cyber Protect is rated 8.2, while N-able Cove Data Protection is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Acronis Cyber Protect writes " Good backup solution but challenges with the stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of N-able Cove Data Protection writes "Provides feature flexibility and modularity for our customers". Acronis Cyber Protect is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365, Acronis Cyber Protect Cloud, Azure Backup and Veritas Backup Exec, whereas N-able Cove Data Protection is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365, Azure Backup, MSP360 Backup and Datto Cloud Continuity. See our Acronis Cyber Protect vs. N-able Cove Data Protection report.
See our list of best Cloud Backup vendors and best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Backup 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.
