No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Arcserve UDP vs IBM Tivoli CDP for Files comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Arcserve UDP
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
28th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (18th)
IBM Tivoli CDP for Files
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
75th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of Arcserve UDP is 1.2%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Tivoli CDP for Files is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Arcserve UDP1.2%
IBM Tivoli CDP for Files0.5%
Other98.3%
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

Sergio Itikawa - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Solutions Architect at SPEData
Has supported hybrid IT environments effectively and offers strong data protection
With Arcserve UDP, the most valuable feature is to improve persistent data, which I consider important. I use other products too, not only Arcserve UDP, as we use TrueNAS as well. Arcserve UDP improves the precision of data. I have utilized Arcserve UDP's data deduplication feature, and the data deduplication feature helps my storage efficiency significantly. I have used Arcserve UDP's continuous data protection. It is beneficial for operational continuity because we use it constantly and have no objections to Arcserve UDP technology; I think it is very good. Arcserve UDP's integration with multiple operating systems is very good and very efficient. This brings value for me since many of my clients have different operating systems like Windows and Linux; there is no problem. Regarding the deduplication and compression with Arcserve UDP, I think Arcserve UDP is still a solid solution that we primarily use.
reviewer1035033 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Aix Admin at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Restoration and infrastructure are extremely reliable
We are currently using Tivoli to backup 15 terabytes within our Oracle Database using a RMAN backup script. The RMAN's utility and restoration has been perfect, we have yet to experience any issues. It's very reliable The restoration and infrastructure are extremely reliable. We would like to…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I would recommend it if there is a general case."
"I proposed and set up DR and HA solutions for customers who are high profile and in need of business critical functionalities."
"The most valuable feature is the duplication."
"The most valuable features of this solution are that I can by just one click, copy and paste anything that I would want, I do not have to restore the whole virtual machine, I can just right-click, open it in Arcserve view, and copy anything I want to add to the production, and the restore function is very fast, which is a huge benefit."
"I like the tool's speed."
"Instant recovery is the most valuable feature of Arcserve UDP."
"Our customers are happy with the product’s functionality."
"This product is extremely user-friendly and it is capable of performing large-scale archive/backup (five+ years worth)."
"Even though a lot of other people like Veeam, Tivoli's restoration and infrastructure are unbeatable, making them the only ones that we rely on despite other feasible options."
"The restoration and infrastructure is extremely reliable."
 

Cons

"Every time I change the disc, I have to do a full backup."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"Its interface can be improved. I find it unintuitive."
"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."
"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."
"I don't know whether the tool has VMware integrations. It would be good to cover this area if it doesn't have those."
"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 speed of restores should be improved. We have found the speed of large restores rather slow."
"We rarely need to reach out to customer service; however, when we do, they have not been able to help us resolve a single call."
"We would like to have the opportunity to omit data from being backed up. For example, we have three virtual machines, each with three disks. When running the backup, it will automatically take each disk rather than allowing us to select what data we want backed."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is very expensive."
"The solution is not very expensive, but it is not cheap."
"It is a bit pricey, considering the reliability problems. If the tool worked flawlessly, the price would be fair, even cheap."
"I do not work with the pricing or licensing issues of the solution for our organization."
"The pricing is moderate."
"The solution is priced well compared to other solutions."
"There are annual subscription fees and there are licensing costs for three computers. It is an expensive solution."
"I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"It's expensive, but it's worth for it due to the volume of critical information within our database. We are currently paying about $22,000 per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business25
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise9
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Major Differences Between These 4 Backup and Disaster Recovery Solutions?
Comparing the features of the four is not the right approach. You need to develop a list of requirements for backup and DR that are specific to your organization and then compare each of the four ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for StorageCraft ShadowProtect?
Regarding the setup cost for Arcserve UDP, it is significantly important, but the price is similar to all our options where clients need to have backup on-premises and replication in the cloud.
What needs improvement with StorageCraft ShadowProtect?
One area for improvement in Arcserve UDP is its capability to interact with other cloud servers. We faced challenges in capturing the data from these servers and had to subscribe to another applica...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

StorageCraft ShadowProtect, StorageCraft Backup Analyzer
Tivoli CDP for Files
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ITPS, North Hertfordshire Homes, SEMIKRON, Kajaani University of Applied Sciences, Test Valley Borough Council, EK Services
Cyberian Data Protection
Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Rubrik and others in Backup and Recovery. Updated: May 2026.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.