We performed a comparison between N-able Cove Data Protection and Quest NetVault 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."We use a neat feature called VDR status, Virtual Disaster Recovery status. It only works on servers... It's automated. Once or twice a month it will virtually mount the backup and provide a screenshot and advise whether or not there have been any errors."
"The most valuables feature is the alerts and monitoring that catches the failed backups."
"The most valuable feature by far is the Virtual Disaster Recovery. On top of that is the bare-metal recovery. The recovery options that we have are great. We have tested the Virtual Disaster Recovery and the bare-metal recovery in just about any scenario you can think of. We have even restored bare metal, a full server, to a laptop, and had full functionality. It's just insane how well it works and how simple it is. It does most of the work for you."
"One of the bigger features and advantages of the solution is that it is easy to integrate with my RMM which is also N-able."
"Because the package includes cloud storage, we don't need to worry about hosting it inside. That was very important to us. And because the vendor has data centers worldwide, our reps in Europe and other places can get to what they need quickly and easily."
"The solution has reduced backup times by an immeasurable amount. Its backups are incremental, so you are only backing up data changes based on the last 24 hours or so. If you are also maintaining the stored images, the restores are also only incremental, happening in minutes. Whereas, with a lot of the other solutions that we have looked at, each time it goes to refresh the restore, then it has to build a completely new image. That takes forever. This solution also improves recovery time."
"The most valuable aspect is the added protection of having a cloud-based backup service. It provides redundancy in case of data loss."
"The most valuable feature is that it's hands-off. I log in every morning and there are pre-canned filters that I've created to make my life easier. I have something called server status color bars, and that gives me all the servers and, in a nutshell, I can see: if any errors are being reported; when the last backup was; if one is not working, should there be one, and it literally jumps off the page."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It's not that complicated. Deployment took maybe about 15 minutes."
"The platform helps us with efficient QoreStor deduplication (DD) capabilities and configuration."
"The user interface is good."
"Its dashboard is quite well done. When you log into the GUI, you can basically see everything you need to know. There is also the possibility to edit the view as you like, which is great."
"It has File and SQL backup, which is the main benefit for us."
"The solution allows us to block off our network and only give access to whatever we want."
"The interface is very user-friendly."
"Having the web-based interface is important to us because we can access it from any computer in the network, rather than having it installed and available for use only on a specific one."
"There could be a possibility to create a local NAS backup for infrastructure."
"For the MSP side, they could have more of a "security user" that can go in and only see certain clients. If you give somebody access as a technician, they can see all the clients."
"An area for improvement that would really work out well would be if there were a little bit more of an elegant handshake relationship between SolarWinds RMM and the PCs that are being backed up, to advise regarding "up" status... Since RMM is an agent that feeds back that a machine is alive and on, I don't see any reason why they can't either tap into that one feature or build the same exact polling within the backup agent, to update right away and say the system is online or offline."
"We don't use the solution’s automated recovery testing because SolarWinds made me cross. When they released it, I went, "Oh, well, that's quite good." Because if you use the system, then it supposedly spins up, and on the portal, it gives you a screenshot of the booted device. So, I phoned up, and I said, "Oh, that's really quite cool. How much is that?" They said, "No, no, no. It's all included in your license." I went, "Okay then," and went and deployed it on about half the fleet. One of the options that our customers have is they can pay us a small amount every month for us to test the recovery just to prove that it's viable, and I thought, "Well, this will do that for us. Nice." Then, in the next invoice, we got a charge for it. While It was not a huge amount, I took offense at the fact that we were told that it would be a no extra cost option that was part of our license, but it turns out that it's chargeable. Therefore, we haven't used it since."
"I have some issues with the agent failing on workstations. I've had to completely uninstall several of them, delete everything, and start over to get them to work."
"The reporting feature and functionality need improvement. We would like to see a little bit more detailed reporting that offers more CEO or C-level focused reporting options."
"One area I don't like has to do with the agent that goes on the system... if a system stays offline for some length of time, say for a week or so, I may have to go back in and reinstall the agent to get it back in business. I don't know what's causing that."
"The only area that needs improvement is that it is a little bit difficult when you get into virtual machines. The initial deployment of Cove is a little tedious, not for standard machines, but when you get into specialty stuff, like Hyper-V."
"In the next version, I would like to see support for the MongoDB database. As it is now, there is no component that works with it and we cannot back the data up using NetVault."
"The interface can be improved. It should be more clear what features are available and make them easy to find."
"The stability of the solution is poor."
"I would like to see the option of cloud-based management."
"There are command-line limitations. There is not a very strong possibility to work with the command line. The commands that are there are not that powerful, and you need to be very good at scripting, for example, in PowerShell or in Bash in case it is running on Linux systems. You need to combine a lot of commands together, and still, you will not get a great output that is presentable to others. You cannot work with it as easily."
"There are certain issues with the product that we report to Quest, and we get offered a workaround instead of a fix. There could be better interaction with the development teams, perhaps in terms of transparency."
"The initial setup is a little complex."
"The storage capacity is very low."
N-able Cove Data Protection is ranked 8th in Backup and Recovery with 20 reviews while Quest NetVault is ranked 45th in Backup and Recovery with 10 reviews. N-able Cove Data Protection is rated 9.2, while Quest NetVault is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of N-able Cove Data Protection writes "Provides feature flexibility and modularity for our customers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest NetVault writes "Easy to use, stable, affordable pricing model, and good technical support". N-able Cove Data Protection is most compared with Acronis Cyber Protect, Veeam Backup & Replication, Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365, Azure Backup and MSP360 Backup, whereas Quest NetVault is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Quest Rapid Recovery, Veritas NetBackup, Commvault Cloud and Rubrik. See our N-able Cove Data Protection vs. Quest NetVault 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.
