We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and Zerto 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."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."
"Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"The documentation is good, and it can be integrated with other products."
"It is a very stable product and very scalable."
"We use the tool for business continuity purposes."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of what is happening with our business as well as the good reporting and dashboards."
"Our primary use case is for disaster recovery and business continuity and disaster recovery (BCDR)."
"We work a lot with customers that need disaster recovery and the best possible migration approaches, and Zerto helps them minimize the amount of effort it takes to finish their upgrades or migrations."
"The fact that we are able to test the failover of live systems during regular hours is invaluable to our organization."
"The replication piece with the built-in WAN compression is important because the network circuit that we send our replication traffic across isn't actually behind our normal WAN accelerators. We were able to use Zerto's built-in WAN acceleration to help those workloads compress."
"The biggest benefit is the application-consistent disaster recovery functionality."
"It reduced the time for DR tests from the infrastructure side. Being able to get our work done in a matter of a couple of minutes so the app teams can get to work and can do their testing has been significant."
"The quickness and efficiency of creating snapshots, on a real-time basis, is one of the most valuable features. Whenever changes are made on a server, Zerto starts taking snapshots right away and replicating them to the DR site. It's very effective and very quick."
"The disaster recovery features are the best I've found."
"Zerto saved us a lot of money compared to the cost of replicating at the LUN level. It also really simplified it and gave us shorter RTOs and RPOs."
"The immutable backup could be better."
"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."
"I would like to see more security features."
"One area for improvement with Azure is helping customers predict usage more accurately."
"I conveyed the feedback to the agent, suggesting an increase in the agent count in our VNS in the USA. I also addressed notification concerns, as some issues didn't trigger alerts during a recent call."
"The support team took a lot of time to respond and was not very professional."
"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We need to be able to move the virtual servers and not build and then port them across. They need to improve the hypervisor."
"It is difficult to manage failing over between sites if you are at the site that was impacted."
"We have had issues with licensing, where the license we've been given by Zerto support doesn't include VSS replication, which was a pain at the time."
"I would like to see some improvements with APIs going into the cloud so that they can more natively orchestrate the migration point-to-point without special hands-on configuration. Azure does some of that natively by having an agent on the VM, but Zerto could improve on its APIs into Azure or Google so that spinning up works more natively in that environment. It would make things smoother."
"There is a need to allow the source vCenter Inventory to be imported with a single click."
"Not all of the knowledge required for implementing Zerto is available in their online documentation for non-partners."
"The setup process is time-consuming."
"The VPG model causes us a bit of concern. We are considering using Zerto to replace Site Recovery Manager. Site Recovery Manager is very easy when we have entire data scores being replicated. We don't have to make any decisions when it comes to groupings. It is all covered. If we move to Zerto, which we are considering, we will have to work much closer with the applications teams to develop the VPG configuration and determine how the VMs will be grouped. It will be a lot more overhead for us to go that route."
"In terms of improvement, it would be helpful if the implementation team had a better best practices guide and made sure things like the journaling are very clearly understood."
Azure Site Recovery is ranked 1st in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 19 reviews while Zerto is ranked 2nd in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software with 236 reviews. Azure Site Recovery is rated 8.2, while Zerto is rated 9.0. 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 Zerto writes "Gives us business continuity capabilities during hurricane season and in case of ransomware". Azure Site Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, VMware SRM, AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery, Commvault Cloud and VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery, whereas Zerto is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, VMware SRM, Rubrik, Commvault Cloud and Nutanix Disaster Recovery as a Service . See our Azure Site Recovery vs. Zerto 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.