We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and Rubrik based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"It is a very stable product and very scalable."
"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."
"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."
"The documentation is good, and it can be integrated with other products."
"Azure Site Recovery's automated file synchronization was a game-changer in managing legacy systems."
"Azure Site Recovery is an easy-to-use and fairly stable solution for disaster recovery."
"Its reporting is most valuable. I like how it reports that everything is successfully backed up. It provides a summarized report that I can give to auditors and management."
"The Live Mount feature is excellent; it's useful for the backup administrator and end user."
"Not having to specify a time to run a backup with a fixed schedule is something that's really beneficial. In the past we had to schedule and try to manually stagger things over the window, to back up everything. Because Rubrik is SLA-based, you say, "Well, I need it to fit in this window here," and it just backs it up when it's most convenient for the Brik and for the third-party system. It looks at the CPU usage and says, "Okay, it's not as busy now. I know I've got time to take the backup." That's a real advantage."
"Intelligent agent technology."
"The ease of use is the most valuable feature. It is a very simple system compared to just about any other back up technology. It is extremely easy to use and very versatile."
"The user interface (UI) is great. It is very lightweight and intuitive."
"The most valuable feature is the archive to cloud location and the automation around the PowerShell script. There are also reports and dashboards."
"The solution is extremely stable. They've been phenomenal, especially for a young company."
"We need to be able to move the virtual servers and not build and then port them across. They need to improve the hypervisor."
"In the newest version of Azure Site Recovery, the configuration was a little more complex, so this is an area for improvement."
"Azure Site Recovery's deployment is complex. There are a lot of bugs, and it needs to improve stability."
"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."
"Could have more integration with other platforms."
"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."
"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I hope to see enhancements in areas like data governance and the incorporation of new features in future updates."
"Its reporting can be improved. Sometimes, I need to create reports to know whether something is available or not, how much frontend data is being protected, etc. Rubrik gives a lot of things in the report, which can be confusing. It isn't very easy to get reports. It shows all the backup, index, replication, and everything else in one report. So, I have to export, filter, and then do the calculations."
"They have what's called an organization which means different groups of access to Rubrik, but the alerting only goes to the admins. My suggestion to Rubrik is to make sure that the separate organizations or groups of users get the appropriate alerting."
"It is not Windows Cluster-Aware at the moment or Exchange DAG-Aware. If they add support for these particular use cases, it would be even better."
"It does not offer image-level backups for Hyper-V 2012."
"The interface is still slightly clunky and has room for improvement. They do work with us whenever we mention anything that needs to be done or anything that we want. We find that bringing up the management interface is a little slow and not as intuitive as we would like, but it's been getting better as it evolves."
"It needs to keep innovating to stay relevant in the data management field."
"The only thing that can be improved is catering for open source databases because at the moment it doesn't cater for Mongo, MySQL, and Postgres."
Azure Site Recovery is ranked 1st in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 19 reviews while Rubrik is ranked 4th in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software with 84 reviews. Azure Site Recovery is rated 8.2, while Rubrik is rated 9.2. 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 Rubrik writes "Easy to use with minimal training required, innovative, good support". Azure Site Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, VMware SRM, AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and Datto Cloud Continuity, whereas Rubrik is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Cohesity DataProtect, Commvault Cloud, Zerto and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain). See our Azure Site Recovery vs. Rubrik report.
See our list of best Disaster Recovery (DR) Software vendors.
We monitor all Disaster Recovery (DR) Software 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.
