Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 17, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon EFS (Elastic File Sy...
Ranking in Cloud Storage
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
File and Object Storage (8th)
NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP
Ranking in Cloud Storage
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (1st), Cloud Backup (10th), Public Cloud Storage Services (5th), Cloud Software Defined Storage (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Cloud Storage category, the mindshare of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is 8.4%, down from 10.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is 13.4%, down from 13.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Storage
 

Featured Reviews

MuhammadAzhar Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Auto-scaling capabilities enhance file management while reducing downtime
The most valuable feature of Amazon EFS is its auto-scaling capability. It's really easy to configure EFS by just creating it and running a command to directly configure it with my servers. It supports unlimited use, and charges are applied based on the file usage at the end of the month. The solution offers reduced downtime and increased durability through its auto-scaling features.
Pramod-Talekar - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows customers to manage SAN and NAS data within a single storage solution
The tool's most valuable features are the SnapLock and SnapMirror features. If something goes wrong with the data, we can restore it. This isn't a mirror; we store data in different locations. If there's an issue on the primary site, we can retrieve data from the secondary site. Multiprotocol support in NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is beneficial because it allows customers to manage SAN and NAS data within a single storage solution. This feature eliminates the need to purchase different types of storage.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Amazon EFS offers the flexibility of scaling as needed without requiring pre-provisioned storage."
"The platform is highly scalable."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"Amazon EFS is extremely stable, as it is managed by AWS."
"Amazon EFS is extremely stable, as it is managed by AWS."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"Its functionality and technical support are adequate to help prevent failure due to errors."
"The ability for our users to restore data from the Snapshots is very valuable."
"ONTAP's snapshot copies and thin clones in terms of operational recovery are pretty useful in recovering your data from a time in a snapshot. That's pretty useful for when you have an event where a disaster struck and then you need to recover all your data. It's pretty helpful and pretty fast in those terms."
"The solution’s Snapshot copies and thin clones in terms of operational recovery are the best thing since sliced bread. Rollback is super easy. It's just simple, and it works. It's very efficient."
"The fast recovery time objective with the ability to bring the environment back to production in case something happens."
"The good thing about NetApp is the features that are available on the cloud are also available on-premises."
"One thing I have noticed is that it is very simple to move the data where we need to move it, delete it, or archive it if we need to archive it to StorageGRID."
"SnapMirror helps mirror metadata and data volumes between endpoints in a data fabric."
 

Cons

"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."
"The initial setup requires prior experience and technical skills."
"Around 80 percent of the features of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) are available on Linux and not in Windows, making it a major drawback of the product."
"EFS could be improved by including a one-click setup."
"The product's stability has some shortcomings where improvements are required."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"The navigation on some of the configuration parameters is a bit cumbersome, making the learning curve on functions somewhat steep."
"We want to be able to add more than six disks in aggregate, but there is a limit of the number of disks in aggregate. In GCP, they provide less by limiting the sixth disk in aggregate. In Azure, the same solution provides 12 disks in an aggregate versus GCP where it is just half that amount. They should bump up the disk in aggregate requirement so we don't have to migrate the aggregate from one to another when the capacities are full."
"The key feature, that we'd like to see in that is the ability to sync between regions within the AWS and Azure regions. We could use the cloud sync service, but we'd really like that native functionality within the cloud volume service."
"The solution is not stable when using single nodes. This is a problem. NetApp should work on this solution to make it more stable with HA nodes and resolve this issue."
"Cloud Volumes ONTAP's interface could use an overhaul. Sometimes you have to dig around in Cloud Manager a little bit to find certain things. The layout could be more intuitive."
"The encryption and deduplication features still have a lot of room for improvement."
"The cost needs improvement."
"The only area for improvement would be some guidance in terms of the future products that NetApp is planning on releasing. I would like to see communication around that or advice such as, "Hey, the world is moving towards this particular trend, and NetApp can help you do that." I do get promotional emails from NetApp, but customer-specific advice would be helpful, based on our use cases."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's price is mid-ranged."
"It has flexible pricing. You are charged based on your storage."
"Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) offers a pay-as-you-go model, so whenever you use its services, you need to pay."
"The main challenge with EFS is its cost, which is slightly higher compared to EBS or S3. For one GB or ten GB of data, S3 is much cheaper. EFS could cost around $30 to $50 per month for similar usage."
"I would rate the pricing 7 out of 10."
"The product's price depends on the services and the size and capacity at which it is used in a business environment."
"The product charges are based on the amount of data stored."
"It is expensive. There are no costs in addition to their standard licensing fees."
"Cost is a big factor, because a lot of companies can't afford enterprise grade equipment all the time. They skimp where they can. I would recommend that they improve the cost."
"We find the pricing to be favorable due to the educational sector we belong to."
"The cost is quite high."
"The solution's pricing is reasonable."
"It is not a cheap solution because we need to pay for the license and pay for Azure resources as well."
"The pricing of this solution is definitely higher than what the typical Azure Files and AWS solutions charge, but given the features and the stability NetApp has provided, we are okay with it. We are not complaining about the pricing."
"They give us a good price for CVO licenses. It is one of the reasons that we went with the product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Storage solutions are best for your needs.
842,194 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
55%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which file storage system is better - Amazon EFS (elastic file storage) or Azure File Storage?
Amazon EFS is easy to set up: you can use the AWS management console, API, or command-line. Amazon EFS can grow to petabytes and deliver consistent low latencies and high levels of throughput. This...
What do you like most about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)?
The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)?
Amazon EFS is more costly compared to other storage options available from AWS.
What do you like most about NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP?
So a lot of these licenses are at the rate that is required for capacity. So they're they're able to reduce the license consumption and also the consumption of the underlying cloud storage.
 

Also Known As

No data available
ONTAP Cloud, CVO, NetApp CVO
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Arcesium, Atlassian, Seeking Alpha, Zend
1. Accenture 2. Acer 3. Adidas 4. Aetna 5. AIG 6. Apple 7. Bank of America 8. Barclays 9. Bayer 10. Berkshire Hathaway 11. BNP Paribas 12. Cisco 13. Coca-Cola 14. Comcast 15.ConocoPhillips 16. CVS Health 17. Dell 18. Deutsche Bank 19. eBay 20. Eli Lilly 21. FedEx 22. Ford 23. Freescale Semiconductor 24. General Electric 25. Google 26. Honeywell 27. IBM 28. Intel 29. Intuit 30. JPMorgan Chase 31. Kellogg's 32. KeyCorp 33. Liberty Mutual 34. L'Oréal 35. Mastercard
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,194 professionals have used our research since 2012.