We compared Commvault Complete Data Protection and Nakivo based on user reviews in five categories. We reviewed all of the data and you can find the conclusion below.
Features: Commvault Complete Data Protection is highly regarded for its extensive recovery options and compatibility with diverse storage systems. Nakivo is praised for its offsite backup to Synology NAS and seamless cloud integration. Users suggest that Commvault Complete Data Protection could offer more Windows security features and a unified console. They said Commvault should expand support for container-based systems and improve its ability to archive large video files. Nakivo could benefit from improvements in its remote upgrade capabilities, SNMP features, and application backup.
Service and Support: Commvault Complete Data Protection earned mostly positive feedback for its customer service, but some Commvault customers mentioned concerns about network-related support and the need for more direct access during emergencies. Nakivo's support is praised for being quick, considerate, and attentive.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Commvault Complete Data Protection is complex, time-consuming, and may require outside help. The lack of sufficient documentation and online resources adds to the difficulty. Nakivo's setup was described as straightforward. A few users said the deployment was somewhat complex but not excessively difficult.
Pricing: Commvault may need to lower its price to attract customers in certain regions and customer segments. Nakivo offers lower licensing costs and a flexible pricing structure. Nakivo provides cost-efficient backups at a competitive price and even offers a free license for one year for up to five VMs.
ROI: Commvault Complete Data Protection offers significant cost savings. Some enterprise customers estimated that they saved between $100,000 to $300,000 by reducing labor costs, speeding up backup and recovery, and implementing remote access. Nakivo ensures a favorable return on investment with a reasonable total cost of ownership and reduced testing expenditures.
Comparison Results: Commvault Complete Data Protection is a robust and flexible solution with the potential to save customers money, but users say the setup is too complex and it needs better support for container-based systems. Nakivo is a powerful, cost-effective solution that seamlessly integrates with the cloud, but it could use some enhancements in its SNMP features and remote upgrading functionality.
"It is a scalable solution."
"The multi-tenancy is the most valuable feature for us because it's the only software that is fully multi-tenant and that has all the features we need to provide to all our tenants. It provides us with advanced features for MySQL and Oracle, among other platforms"
"Well documented SQL views and customizable reports, together with scripts and workflows provides ability to automate processes and ensure proper controls are in place."
"Commvault is a stable solution for Red Hat Linux."
"The solution includes the best compatibility metrics for integration and they are managed by Google support."
"Commvault provides the status of a backup or restore operation."
"The product is user-friendly."
"The data is well-protected. It doesn't age off until it's copied. That's a big feature right there. When you reach the end of your retention, it does not expire until the secondary copy is completed. That allows you to hold onto data that otherwise would have aged off by retention. I like that feature. It's hard to just delete or lose data using the Commvault platform."
"The fact that it works with Synology is a big valuable point. Also, that we can check the functionality of a backup so easily. Cloud integration is valuable because the ability to not only backup locally, but to the cloud, has been a great addition to the already fantastic product. We can save so much time with Nakivo and are very happy that we found it and loved to use it for our solutions."
"Cloud integration is valuable because the ability to not only backup locally, but to the cloud, has been a great addition to the already fantastic product."
"The solution has a user-friendly interface and is easy to configure."
"The user interface is good, and it's user-friendly. I also like its usability with hyper-convergence products like Nutanix and others in the data infrastructure."
"The back-up and restore functions work great and it's easy to use."
"This product has a very clean and intuitive GUI."
"The ability to use a variety of cloud providers rather than being tied into one is a huge bonus."
"The user interface in general is very good. I"
"They could work on the implementation of the features."
"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."
"They can always improve the interface design to make it easier. Sometimes, you need to click two or three times to do something. They should look at what tabs are used most and make them more accessible, to cut the time it takes to get to that information."
"Its competitor, Veeam, includes backup and replication in the same product. I don't know if Commvault has it or not, but they should if they don't."
"Setup is complex."
"Additional SaaS application support would be good... we have SaaS applications that may not be big enough for Commvault to support yet. Box.com is one we've asked about for years, and it's just not on the radar, as far as I know."
"They can improve the security level for Windows. When mapping to the Windows, Commvault can take full control over data volumes so that the attacker can't delete the volume data, but the Windows admin can access the volumes. It would be great to block access at that level."
"I need documentation for Azure backups. One expectation that I have is regarding PDF documentation. When I was trying to browse the documentation, I could not locate that."
"It'll help if they offered some automation and more usability for partners."
"We'd like to see a legacy environment backup, like AIX, etc."
"I would like to see some additional models in the next release to make backups more functional."
"In the future, I would like to see support for backing up data to more cloud platforms, besides Amazon."
"I would like to have a built-in SNMP client, which is important if we want to monitor it using Zabbix, Nagios, or another monitoring solution."
"It would be great if the product could be expanded to support other virtual technologies."
"There is a familiar error that pops up and that is a VM error as much as it is a Nakivo error. It says that the job couldn't calm the VM and restores might be impacted. That error is, to say the least, a bit scary. I have seen this type of error on other backup systems also."
"Space is always an issue."
Commvault Cloud is ranked 3rd in Backup and Recovery with 104 reviews while NAKIVO Backup & Replication is ranked 6th in Backup and Recovery with 84 reviews. Commvault Cloud is rated 8.6, while NAKIVO Backup & Replication is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Commvault Cloud writes "Provides excellent visibility and helps reduce costs and time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NAKIVO Backup & Replication writes "Good deduplication, easy to configure, and offers a free version". Commvault Cloud is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365, Azure Backup and Zerto, whereas NAKIVO Backup & Replication is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Hornetsecurity Altaro VM Backup, Acronis Cyber Protect, Rubrik and IBM Spectrum Protect. See our Commvault Cloud vs. NAKIVO Backup & Replication report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors and best Disaster Recovery (DR) Software 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.
