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

Arcserve UDP vs OpenText Data Protector comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 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

Arcserve UDP
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
26th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (18th)
OpenText Data Protector
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
23rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
102
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of Arcserve UDP is 1.2%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Data Protector is 1.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Data Protector1.0%
Arcserve UDP1.2%
Other97.8%
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.
reviewer1751496 - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager and Technical Consultant at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Provides effective backup for physical servers and needs improvements for cloud compatibility
We use OpenText Data Protector for Oracle database backup and some applications that run for database security OpenText Data Protector is good for physical backup, specifically for physical servers. It is effective for direct backups to EMC library or storage without using a repository. However,…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the things that I do like about it is that it has a very good deduplication feature."
"It's simple to set up."
"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."
"Arcserve UDP's integration with multiple operating systems is very good and very efficient, which brings value for me since many of my clients have different operating systems like Windows and Linux; there is no problem."
"The standard backup and restore feature is most used."
"The most valuable feature of Arcserve UDP is its decompression capability."
"The ROI is very good because of the speed of the backup."
"We are satisfied with Arcserve UDP. The most important feature that we use and why we choose this product is the RHA feature."
"The most valuable feature of Data Protector is its integration with VMware. A lot of software these days integrates with VMware, and you can run some of these things on virtual machines. You can even have your backup manager running on a virtual machine and use physical managers to move data around. Their VMware integration isn't too bad, but Commvault has that feature, and many other backup products do."
"In one of the projects involving a database and UCMDB integration, we needed to manage a large database. We used the scheduling feature in Data Protector to automate backups."
"The installation was simple and provided an easy way to install even on Unix servers. It has excellent features like deduplication."
"Data Protector is very good at automation. From the time of the backup, verification, and copy to tape, it is very good. I don't need to touch it, it will do it by itself."
"Micro Focus Data Protector's most valuable feature is its interaction with the fiber share. It is easy to use, we use it to back up without any problem to VTLs, and can use the Fiber Channel that is still the TCP."
"It is a traditional backup model. If you talk about file server and the official Windows database, it's a stable product."
"The dashboards in Micro Focus Data Protector are very good. They are similar to the dashboards in Veeam Backup & Replication."
"The solution allows us to be able to backup and exchange directly, to backup Microsoft exchange."
 

Cons

"The speed of restores should be improved. We have found the speed of large restores rather slow."
"Every time I change the disc, I have to do a full backup."
"Backups are very slow and time consuming."
"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."
"In the most recent version of premium plus the replication has been removed, and it should re-added to the solution."
"Its interface can be improved. I find it unintuitive."
"The solution's reporting could be improved and should provide customized reports."
"Licensing is an area that needs improvement."
"Micro Focus Data Protector must improve its overall evolution record. They need to focus on hardware based instant recovery, client recovery, and cloud ability. Now there is no cloud ability."
"The technical support was very slow."
"If you compare the solution with the same specific features and enhancements on another solution, Data Protector is expensive. This is especially true when compared to, for example, Veeam."
"Micro Focus are improving Data Protector with every new version and since we began undergoing training with the latest version we have not faced any real challenges yet. However, their support does need to be improved, in my opinion. In certain critical cases that we've had, they did not provide a satisfactory level of support."
"OpenText Data Protector is more difficult to use and configure than OpenText VIM. The user-friendliness of OpenText Data Protector has to be increased, and the complexity of the tool needs to be reduced."
"In general, you can say that Micro Focus Data Protector is behind in capabilities when compared with other backup solutions, such as Commvault, Symantec, NetBackup, but it is very strong for certain use cases such as array integration. We are using it in production even now. There should be some kind of cloud integration and archiving solutions. I think this is the area they need to focus on."
"Many of our users complain about the GUI. You still need to rely on the command line interface. Because it originated as a Unix system, Data Protector is still a command line-driven solution, which makes it seem rather dated compared to systems that are built around a GUI from day one. It doesn't affect the functionality, but some people don't find it user-friendly."
"The scheduler setup could be better. We are facing some issues scheduling the job based on our requirements."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Normally our customers purchase the premium plus license, rather than the standard one, which provides more options."
"The solution is expensive."
"I do not work with the pricing or licensing issues of the solution for our organization."
"I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price."
"The licensing cost is for one year. There are not any hidden costs involved in the pricing model of the solution."
"The pricing is moderate."
"It is a bit pricey, considering the reliability problems. If the tool worked flawlessly, the price would be fair, even cheap."
"Pricing is most likely comparable."
"Pricing/licensing is Data Protector's single best offering. In its most basic environment, the only license required is for whatever target device is required."
"Our licensing is on a capacity basis."
"Data Protector's pricing is very competitive and we have no issues in this regard. I would give it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."
"We have many competitors who are pricing better, and we believe that our pricing is higher."
"In Data Protector, if you need extra features, you need to buy the agents for these features. Some of the features are Terabytes, some of them are agents. There's some complexity in the pricing and licensing."
"The license for the solution is very expensive compared to the other products in the market."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor very cheap."
"They have two types of licensing, one is for storage capacity and the other is client licensing. The capacity licensing here is a bit expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
881,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Government
7%
Performing Arts
10%
Marketing Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business24
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business28
Midsize Enterprise22
Large Enterprise61
 

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 do you like most about StorageCraft ShadowProtect?
The interface is very refined, works fine, and is very intuitive most of the time. Scalability is nice. The multi-tenancy feature is very welcome. The integration with Linux works fine too.
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Data Protector?
The solution is expensive as it requires purchasing all features without the option to negotiate based on client numbers, unlike Veeam which offers flexibility in pricing.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Data Protector?
OpenText Data Protector is not user-friendly, especially for cloud backup. It lacks functions and facilities compared to Veeam, which offers more user-friendliness for virtual machine backups. Ther...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Data Protector?
We use OpenText Data Protector ( /products/opentext-data-protector-reviews ) for Oracle database backup and some applications that run for database security.
 

Also Known As

StorageCraft ShadowProtect, StorageCraft Backup Analyzer
Micro Focus Data Protector, Data Protector, OmniBack, HPE Data Protector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ITPS, North Hertfordshire Homes, SEMIKRON, Kajaani University of Applied Sciences, Test Valley Borough Council, EK Services
GSK Vaccines, Repsol, Vodafone Group, Siemens AG, Medium Enterprise Transportation Services Company
Find out what your peers are saying about Arcserve UDP vs. OpenText Data Protector and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.