We compared Dell Avamar and Nakivo based on user reviews in five categories. We reviewed all of the data and you can find the conclusion below.
Features: Dell Avamar earns acclaim for its scalability, data compression capabilities, swift incremental backups, and seamless integration with Data Domain and VM stacks. Nakivo is praised for its offsite backup to Synology NAS and seamless cloud integration. Dell Avamar could improve its tape connectivity and bare-metal restoration. Users also requested better Azure backups and a more user-friendly interface. Nakivo could benefit from improvements in its remote upgrade capabilities, SNMP features, and application backup.
Service and Support: Some customers express satisfaction with Dell support, but others said there is room for improvement. Nakivo's support is praised for being quick, considerate, and attentive.
Ease of Deployment: Opinions on Dell Avamar’s setup were mixed. Some users found it to be straightforward, while others considered it complex and difficult. Deployment time ranged from a few hours to a week, and assistance from Dell engineers might be necessary. Nakivo's setup was described as straightforward. A few users said the deployment was somewhat complex but not excessively difficult.
Pricing: Dell Avamar’s pricing is generally seen as reasonable, but some users think it is expensive. 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: Dell Avamar provides cost savings through data reduction, deduplication, and compression. Nakivo ensures a favorable return on investment with a reasonable total cost of ownership and reduced testing expenditures.
Comparison Results: Dell Avamar is a scalable solution that offers excellent data compression and fast compression. However, Avamar earned mixed reviews for support, deployment, and pricing. Users also requested better Azure and bare-metal backups and restoration capabilities. 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.
"Scheduling is valuable. It does a good job of backing up, and it does a good job of restoring. Nobody has got a problem with that. The agents are well supported."
"We've been using this solution to backup our servers. It is a simple backup and restore data application."
"The data reduction feature and the ease of enabling a server in a DR location are the most valuable."
"The source site replication feature is valuable."
"The installation of the solution is easy."
"Avamar's source side deduplication is very strong, it can easily back up remote sites' data, and not much bandwidth is required on the Avamar side."
"What I found valuable in Dell Avamar is the deduplication feature. I also like that the solution can be integrated with Data Domain."
"Duplication and the speed of backup are great."
"The product is easy to manage for any IT person who is new to backup, recovery, and replication."
"This product has helped to centralize backups and made it easy to recover data."
"Nakivo's backup and replication product has allowed us to implement a disaster recovery solution with a target repository in the cloud."
"It is easy-to-use."
"The backup for physical machines and replication for the virtual environment are the most valuable aspects."
"Backups are working smoothly with Nakivo Backup."
"We have found all the features of Nakivo to be useful and the solution is easier to use compared to Proxmox. It is user-friendly, we are very satisfied."
"Nakivo offers direct support through the graphical interface and this is great to have if you need quick help."
"The solution should improve its tape-connectivity features."
"When you get down to doing certain things, such as somebody wants a particular file restored, the process by which you do that is stupid. You kind of have to know exactly where to look for in order to find it. Even on older backup products that I've used, I didn't have that kind of problem. If we were looking for a file with a particular kind of a name, the solution would find that file anywhere irrespective of where it resides within the backup system. So, we didn't have to know the name of the specific server, the specific timeframe, almost all the characters of the file name, and all kinds of data in order to find a file. In Avamar, we got to know these details. We've gone around and around with them on that, and their attitude seems to be that it is working just fine. There is nothing for them to improve. The organizational system of other products that I'm working with, such as Zerto and Cohesity, seems to be centered around the tasks that you would most commonly do and want to do, as opposed to we've laid it out in a really neat technical hierarchy."
"Dell EMC Avamar is a very complex product. It took a lot of time for the IT admins to get trained on how to use it. It is not very user-friendly, and we won't be using Avamar anymore. It needs a lot of improvement in terms of how the backups have been configured, and the reporting is too complex."
"The product could be improved by simplifying the components available."
"If there is a need to move the data from one backup solution to another, it might be difficult since there is no option for a straightforward migration."
"Some customers need to back up to tape, but Avamar lacks support, so it costs a lot."
"I would like to see better integration with third-party applications and platforms."
"Performance can sometimes be affected when tools are utilized for tasks like backup or deep archiving."
"Due to the fact that we are HP and Fugit partners as well, it would be nice if Nakivo would allow support for HP and Fugit storage."
"In the future, the solution should provide a more granular backup."
"In terms of what could be improved for the next release, I would probably answer better documentation and licensing models."
"The process for getting unused diskspace back from the data repository is slow."
"I think it is important to work not only in replicating the virtual machines in Amazon AWS, but in other cloud systems."
"The only thing I could say is maybe some more options for job scheduling are needed."
"Right now we know that Nakivo has the ability to back up as an incremental process and restore backups across several criteria. However, it would be good if we had the ability to backup a system like PostgreSQL."
"In the future, I would like to see support for backing up data to more cloud platforms, besides Amazon."
Dell Avamar is ranked 12th in Backup and Recovery with 81 reviews while NAKIVO Backup & Replication is ranked 6th in Backup and Recovery with 84 reviews. Dell Avamar is rated 7.6, while NAKIVO Backup & Replication is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Dell Avamar writes "Stable, integrates well with other solutions, and has a good price, but its UI needs a refresh". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NAKIVO Backup & Replication writes "Good deduplication, easy to configure, and offers a free version". Dell Avamar is most compared with Dell PowerProtect Data Manager, Veeam Backup & Replication, Dell NetWorker, Dell PowerProtect DP (IDPA) and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), whereas NAKIVO Backup & Replication is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Hornetsecurity Altaro VM Backup, Acronis Cyber Protect, Rubrik and Zerto. See our Dell Avamar vs. NAKIVO Backup & Replication 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.
