We performed a comparison between OpenText Data Protector and Zerto based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Deduplication implementation with CAPA is very good."
"I haven't experienced any crashes while using the solution...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Backup of SAP/Oracle -- they are more robust than the competition."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The installation was simple and provided an easy way to install even on Unix servers. It has excellent features like deduplication."
"The stability of the product seems to be quite good."
"The most valuable feature is the capability to back up our SQL server."
"Ability to automatically detect and secure new data sources without requiring manual configuration intervention."
"A great Zerto feature is the non-intrusive failover of the application, similar to an actual disaster recovery test without impacting the services that are currently online. Sometimes customers need to failover to an isolated environment and validate an application without impacting the production environment: we can achieve this goal with Zerto. Again, we can do regular testing in a non-impactful way using isolated testing. For customers of our DRaaS we include once a year, a live test that is more like what would happen if the customer lost the production site. Near-synchronous replication is one of the benefits of Zerto that drove us to choose it over some others. With typical backup and recovery solutions, the recovery point typically is about 24 hours. With the near-synchronous replication, recovery point objectives tend to be minutes or a few seconds if the bandwidth is adequate. That's one of the major benefits of Zerto: there's no need to run incremental backups every xx minutes. And the recovery time is fairly quick as well, like a shutdown and reboot of a VM. Eventually, the VPGs (Virtual Protection Groups) allow to grouping of one or more VMs into a single entity, ensuring every point in time inserted into Zerto’s journal (a checkpoint) is from the same point in time for all components within the protection group. This allows easy recovery of an entire application and its dependencies to a consistent point in time. Zerto is also a very easy product to use."
"There are a lot of valuable features. The basics of what it does to replicate and recover things within minutes is awesome. It's far above anything that any of the competition has. We offer other disaster recovery software but primarily use Zerto for recovery times and the number of recovery points because of how fast and easy it is. It's so much better."
"Zerto is very good at providing continuous data protection. For replication purposes, it's definitely better than Veeam. Veeam doesn't do as good a job as Zerto does when it comes to replication. The other alternative would be to just have backups somewhere. But even with backups, you lose a lot of time because you have to set it all up. With Zerto, you failover, you just click a couple of buttons and you run from the other location."
"It is the backbone of our DR solution for critical databases that hold the data we can't afford to lose. It provided new opportunities to change how we approach disaster recovery."
"The ease of use and simplicity in moving things without having to do a cross-v set of V-motions has been most valuable. It saves time and effort and it eliminates mistakes."
"Zerto is low maintenance, so I can set it and forget it. It has a great process and an excellent solution."
"The near-synchronous replication is one of the primary reasons we're using Zerto because we have recovery intervals of sub-five seconds. On a scale of 10, where 10 is "very important", this feature is a 10."
"It helps us keep our required retention period for specific documents and allows us to recover older documents if we have to compare and recreate those."
"It would be ideal if they could improve their level of support."
"The technical support is poor and should be improved."
"The solution is not intuitive enough. I think they should work on the user experience and the graphical interface. These can be a lot better."
"Integration with the market applications must be improved, such as MS Exchange, MS Active Directory, SAP and Oracle. Other backup tools are more efficient with the integrated backups."
"The challenge is that we can't restore a single file from the VM in the data process when we do VM backups. But with Commvault, you can restore a single file even if you have a VM snapshot package. That's one drawback of this tool. When we do VM backups, it should help us browse the VMs to restore a single file instead of doing the complete VM restore."
"In SAP restoration, we faced issues with changing the SIDs and changing the path for every backup object. It is quite a lengthy process to do that."
"In general, you can say that Micro Focus Data Protector is behind in capabilities when compared with other backup solutions, such as Commvault, Symantec, NetBackup, but it is very strong for certain use cases such as array integration. We are using it in production even now. There should be some kind of cloud integration and archiving solutions. I think this is the area they need to focus on."
"This solution is not scalable."
"If I have to reboot a virtual machine host, I have issues with Zerto catching up afterward. That's about the only thing I would say needs improvement. Sometimes, when I have to do maintenance, Zerto takes a little bit to catch up. That's understandable."
"The replication appliances tend to have issues when they recover from being powered off when a host is in maintenance mode. Sometimes you have to do a manual task where you go in and detach hard disks that are no longer in use, to get the replication appliances to power back on. There are some improvements to be made around the way those recover."
"The replication layer can probably be improved."
"We wanted to shut down the dev environment to focus on the prod environment. We couldn't find any option in Zerto to do that."
"The monitoring and alerting functionality need to be improved."
"It would be nice if Zerto offered OVFs, which are custom-built VMs that you can install on your virtualized environment. At the moment, I have the Zerto sitting on two custom-built Windows servers, which creates a lot of overhead. I'm waiting for them to create an OVF file, which is a built and hardened version of their Zerto server that I can just install wherever with a couple of mouse clicks."
"It needs more documentation and automation features. I would like more documentation on designing an environment and network operations. On the automation side, I would like automation to clean up the environment in cases of a failed DR effort. An API interface to perform the DR exercise would also be nice."
"The only complaint is that if I remove a host from a cluster, it does not like that. If I move and put the host in maintenance mode to fix it, and vRA is down, Zerto does not like it. Zerto should figure out that this host has an issue and it went down. Zerto should then let me upload that vRA information to another vRA."
OpenText Data Protector is ranked 24th in Backup and Recovery with 100 reviews while Zerto is ranked 2nd in Backup and Recovery with 236 reviews. OpenText Data Protector is rated 7.6, while Zerto is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of OpenText Data Protector writes "User-friendly, competitive, agent-based, and easy to manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zerto writes "Gives us business continuity capabilities during hurricane season and in case of ransomware". OpenText Data Protector is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Veritas NetBackup, Symantec Data Loss Prevention and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), whereas Zerto is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, VMware SRM, Rubrik, Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines and VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery. See our OpenText Data Protector vs. Zerto report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery 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.
