We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and Commvault Cloud 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."What I love about Azure Site Recovery is its simplicity for basic configurations."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of what is happening with our business as well as the good reporting and dashboards."
"Azure Site Recovery's automated file synchronization was a game-changer in managing legacy systems."
"Our primary use case is for disaster recovery and business continuity and disaster recovery (BCDR)."
"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."
"It is a very stable product and very scalable."
"Provides generally good performance, from protection to production to failover to data recovery."
"The most valuable features of Commvault Complete Data Protection are the complete feature sets it provides in one platform. You are able to backup many different types of data, such as virtual machines, servers, cloud, endpoints, Microsoft Office365, and Gmail. The usage of the solution is flexible."
"We now have the capability to recover a virtual machine without relying on the NFS system, but instead are able to use certain features provided by Commvault."
"Global deduplication and the indexing of the data object are the most valuable features. It saves costs on the product side by doing compression and deduplication. It will help you and make your life easy to reach the data that you need within the minimum downtime when it's required."
"Commvault integrates well with all types of operating systems and supports heterogeneous environments."
"The solution is very stable and offers a good level of performance."
"The product is a reliable solution."
"Commvault provides data protection. Their engine is ransomware-agnostic so ransomware doesn't compromise our backup data. Therefore, we can rely on their data protection to recover and back up our production system."
"It's a complete software that can protect all the main applications. Perhaps that's the feature I like most. The integration with the NetApp and other apps is also very nice."
"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It could include more of a backup and recovery."
"The solution needs to improve replication and failover processes. We are still looking for improvements in the cost baseline."
"One area for improvement with Azure is helping customers predict usage more accurately."
"I would like to see more security features."
"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."
"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."
"In the newest version of Azure Site Recovery, the configuration was a little more complex, so this is an area for improvement."
"I would like to have a manager-level dashboard to review the backups. This is not from an administrative perspective where you can see the details of the execution. Rather, it would only show the percentage of completeness for each one."
"Mostly controls, visibility, cost allocation."
"I would like to see a more user-friendly GUI."
"It takes a lot of steps to implement backups. We have to do a lot of planning to make the solution work properly. It takes some time to create every policy. It's an easy task, but there are many steps. It's not as easy as using Veeam."
"Commvault HyperScale X is more expensive for hybrid environments than traditional solutions."
"I would like Commvault to have a feature for cybersecurity threats, e.g. securing the target backup repository. Commvault just started testing and releasing this feature, but it needs to be stabilized."
"The solution needs better Office 365 data backup management."
"Just to keep it running is time-consuming. There are five people on my team. Commvault was supposed to be one of the less time-consuming solutions, but in reality it takes 60 percent of our time just to keep it running, and that's not even fine-tuning it; that's just to keep it running."
Azure Site Recovery is ranked 1st in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 19 reviews while Commvault Cloud is ranked 2nd in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 104 reviews. Azure Site Recovery is rated 8.2, while Commvault Cloud is rated 8.6. 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 Commvault Cloud writes "Provides excellent visibility and helps reduce costs and time". Azure Site Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, VMware SRM, AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery, whereas Commvault Cloud is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365, Azure Backup and AWS Backup. See our Azure Site Recovery vs. Commvault Cloud report.
See our list of best Disaster Recovery as a Service vendors and best Disaster Recovery (DR) Software 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.