We performed a comparison between Arcserve UDP and Unitrends based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features are that it is able to restore quickly and that it is able to virtually restore on Hyper-V."
"The most valuable feature of Arcserve UDP is the initiative UI and the logs are clear and detailed that are generated when there has been an issue or failure on the user's system. We only have to log onto the client's system to retrieve the information. It is possible to precisely identify the problem's location. The system categorizes and logs every step in a structured manner, selectively displaying only the essential logs. However, to view a comprehensive log, one must access the line machine log and examine the actual client for detailed logging."
"The recovery part of the product is very good."
"Easy restoration and the solution works quickly."
"There are many backup options available in this solution. For example, you are able to do backups of servers, email, OST files, and users. This is a complete backup solution which is very good."
"This product is extremely user-friendly and it is capable of performing large-scale archive/backup (five+ years worth). It is easy to store, maintain, and check backups."
"The ability to switch between different hardware platforms and utilization tools are some of this solution's most valuable features."
"Our customers are happy with the product’s functionality."
"It is a quick and easy way to organize my backups and to keep track of them."
"Iinstant recovery (allows a spin-up of your image as a VM on the appliance)."
"Being an appliance-based solution, we were able to migrate backup solutions without having to purchase a lot of hardware separately."
"What I found most valuable in Unitrends is its simple user interface. It also works reliably."
"It's not easy to scale it."
"Unitrends has helped us cut down the time that it takes to restore a server to its original configuration."
"The ability to backup both physical and virtual machines, along with having an appliance store the backups locally instead of on a file server, NAS, or SAN."
"It is fairly stable."
"The speed of restores should be improved. We have found the speed of large restores rather slow."
"The initial setup was complex."
"It should be easier to switch between backup locations. We have multiple data storage locations and sometimes one of those storages need to be replaced. It would be nice if they made it easier to reconfigure the backup configuration."
"Based on my experience, whenever we need support, there are difficulties with communication when trying to resolve the issue."
"The only problem with the solution is that when I change the drive capacity, it has to do a full backup. It's a problem when I have five servers to backup. When I only want to change the size of the drive, I have to do a full backup that can take one week."
"The solution can use a lot of bandwidth when the scheduling is not done, it should auto-schedule itself. For example, if there are 50 users connected in the network at 12 o'clock and the backup is not scheduled. At this time the network offices are going to have performance issues when it is doing a backup. Having a feature to auto-schedule a time when the network is not being used often would be beneficial."
"A lot of their new technologies are not very good."
"Licensing can be quite difficult."
"Comparing the features and the working pattern, definitely they have to come down on pricing if they want to compete in the market."
"The ability to run just differentials without pulling the full on your archive."
"There are a few quirks where the GUI, agent, and back-end are not precisely meshed."
"The solution’s UI can be improved. I am saying this because I have seen solutions with better UIs."
"I would like to see more storage options for the free version."
"Follow up for the DRaaS service setup. I'm still waiting to schedule a DRaaS test after upgrading several months ago."
"The solution’s support and onboarding process needs to be improved."
"It would be great to have the job throttle/limit the max number of backups on a single ESXi host."
Arcserve UDP is ranked 18th in Backup and Recovery with 41 reviews while Unitrends is ranked 42nd in Backup and Recovery with 34 reviews. Arcserve UDP is rated 7.6, while Unitrends is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Arcserve UDP writes "Global deduplication, stable, and flexible licensing options". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Unitrends writes "The solution can be used to back up servers and Hyper-V cluster nodes, but its support is super expensive". Arcserve UDP is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Acronis Cyber Protect, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain), Veritas Backup Exec and Rubrik, whereas Unitrends is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Acronis Cyber Protect, Commvault Cloud and Cohesity DataProtect. See our Arcserve UDP vs. Unitrends 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.
