We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines 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 allows my company to save around 30 percent of the time on every VM that we need to back up and restore."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of what is happening with our business as well as the good reporting and dashboards."
"The solution is secure, reliable, and scalable."
"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."
"They're moving a lot of their workload to cloud and aiming for a seamlessly integrated product."
"Azure Site Recovery helps to save costs."
"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."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is that it is journal-based and you don't have to replicate a lot of data."
"One of the standout features of Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is its real-time data protection capability."
"The workload can be moved directly if the disaster site is the main site."
"The most valuable features are the data center recovery administration and the time of recovery."
"Continuous replication with lower RTO and RPO is the most innovative feature. Its tight integration with VMware for VMware VMs is also valuable."
"The installation is straightforward if the version you have is compatible with your infrastructure."
"Point-in-time recovery and ease of deployment are valuable."
"RecoverPoint replicates workloads fast."
"The immutable backup could be better."
"The primary area for improvement in Azure Site Recovery is its pricing."
"The support team took a lot of time to respond and was not very professional."
"In the newest version of Azure Site Recovery, the configuration was a little more complex, so this is an area for improvement."
"Could have more integration with other platforms."
"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."
"The pricing predictability and clarity around the final cost of the plan of this solution could be improved."
"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."
"It can have better integration. It would be good if, in addition to VMware VM, it can also support other hypervisors. I also want to see support for Oracle databases. As of now, it supports only SQL and Exchange. It would be good to also support other databases."
"It would be good to have a critical application on the customer side."
"I would like to see integration with EMC NetWorker in the next release."
"The solution could improve by being more easier to use. However, once you have used it for a while it becomes easier. Additionally, there could be better support and compatibility with management by having a command-line interface. This would be beneficial for the customers."
"The solution is not easy to use. It's actually quite hard. If it could be simplified it might be better for the end user."
"In the next release of this software, I would like to see options that help to decrease the bandwidth required, such as compressing the data."
"The configuration process seems a bit challenging, and the installation takes a bit longer than expected."
"I would like to have the HTML 5 interface working because it is currently not functioning with the VMware environment."
More Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Site Recovery is ranked 1st in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 18 reviews while Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is ranked 11th in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software with 10 reviews. Azure Site Recovery is rated 8.2, while Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is rated 8.0. 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 Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines writes "It replicates workloads fast, but it wastes resources". Azure Site Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, VMware SRM, Zerto, AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and Nutanix Disaster Recovery as a Service , whereas Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is most compared with VMware SRM, Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, Nutanix Disaster Recovery as a Service and HPE Disaster Recovery Services. See our Azure Site Recovery vs. Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines 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.