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

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.6
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery reduces costs, offers versatility, maintains reputation, but snapshot storage can increase expenses for small businesses.
Sentiment score
8.6
Azure Site Recovery offers cost savings and efficiency, reducing VM backup time by 30% compared to Veeam.
Azure Site Recovery is time-saving, and its features allow us to automate processes and save resources.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
8.0
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is praised for effective support, quick response times, and high customer satisfaction, despite lacking ticketing.
Sentiment score
8.5
Azure Site Recovery's support receives mixed reviews, praised for expertise but criticized for delays and complex communication.
We primarily rely on our Cloud Support Partner for support.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery scales efficiently, rated highly for ease of use and flexibility with seamless upgrades and visual reporting.
Sentiment score
7.3
Azure Site Recovery is highly scalable, effectively expanding systems for diverse businesses, despite some synchronization and location-specific challenges.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is stable, with minor issues like server lag and occasional replication lag, rated 8-9 out of 10.
Sentiment score
8.5
Azure Site Recovery is highly stable, with users praising its reliability and only minor, infrequent issues reported.
I would rate the stability of Azure Site Recovery at eight to nine out of ten.
 

Room For Improvement

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery needs better automation, usability, cost efficiency, and AI-driven features for improved functionality and security.
Azure Site Recovery needs improved replication, error logging, pricing clarity, scalability, security features, and better integration with platforms.
Currently, Azure Site Recovery does not support shared disk options.
 

Setup Cost

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery pricing is fair but can be expensive, with varied costs and potential discounts for long-term deals.
Azure Site Recovery pricing is complex, with costs influenced by usage, storage, and network factors, typically around $225 monthly.
 

Valuable Features

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is valued for its replication, reliability, cost-effectiveness, and ease of use for critical workloads.
Azure Site Recovery offers ease of use, scalability, and efficient disaster recovery, despite pricing concerns and shared disk limitations.
Its time-saving aspects allow us to write PowerShell scripts to automate failover processes.
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (31st), Cloud Backup (20th), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (17th)
Azure Site Recovery
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Disaster Recovery as a Service (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

Duy AnhMai - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud-based solution enhances company backup but comes with high costs
We are using AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery for backup purposes in our company AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is convenient because it is cloud-based technology. The strong points are the stability and scalability of the solution, as well as the convenience of it being cloud-based. The cost of…
Mike Douthitt - PeerSpot reviewer
Useful for restoration purposes that ensures that the users get to save a lot of time
Speaking about how Azure Site Recovery has facilitated the migration of on-premises workloads to the Azure Cloud, I would say that my company is still in the testing phase, and we also use Veeam. My company is trying to find the best spot for recovery, disaster recovery, and migrations. Veeam plays a big part in what my company does in terms of backup and recovery, so we are just trying to figure out how a Microsoft tool will fit into our environment. I haven't faced any challenges using the product. I recommended the solution to those who plan to use it. I rate the overall tool a ten out of ten.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
12%
Healthcare Company
10%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
The pricing of AWS is considered expensive compared to other options.
What needs improvement with CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
The cost of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is seen as expensive.
What do you like most about Azure Site Recovery?
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.
What needs improvement with Azure Site Recovery?
Currently, Azure Site Recovery does not support shared disk options. Moreover, it does not support services like AppConfig or App Services. Integrating these services would make the solution more a...
 

Also Known As

CloudEndure Disaster Recovery
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agio, Cloud Nation, Limelight Networks
Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. Azure Site Recovery and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.