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

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs IBM Storage Protect 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

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
26th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Backup (19th), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (14th)
IBM Storage Protect
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
41st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Storage Protect is 0.4%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

Vijay Londhe - PeerSpot reviewer
Managed services with seamless integration and good reliability
Since I have to view everything on the console, the previous application solutions like IBM and Sanavi showed the RPO and RTO status directly. In AWS Disaster Recovery Service, these details are not available, making it difficult to check my replication status. I have to calculate whether my data is replicated to the Adarabad region or not. These features, if available in AWS, would be beneficial.
Maik Zutz - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable enterprise solution for backup and restore
New workloads are not good for storage protect like container or virtual machines. IBM acknowledges that users and partners with companies do it better and integrate it into the product. It takes too much time to implement it in old Storage Protect. It have features for big databases and big data environments. Although, the product seems to be old fashioned, but it is stable, robust and works for the most use cases where a lot of data is to be protected. It could be easier to manage client data. You have to use configuration. It is not on modern architecture. They should change it on the client area. You can achieve a better environment using Protect. IBM tapes serves as an air gap, consumes less energy, and provides a resilient, stable environment with fewer infrastructure and environmental costs. Intergrating it can help store large amounts of data more cheaper than on disk.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"For regular backup and restore solutions, this product is fine."
"The strong points are the stability and scalability of the solution, as well as the convenience of it being cloud-based."
"AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is a robust and reliable solution for disaster recovery needs."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."
"Technical support has been very good. They usually respond quickly to our requests.​"
"The setup is pretty straightforward."
"The solution is dependent on the network bandwidth. For example, if they have a bandwidth of 10Mbps the solution will run a little heavier. If the bandwidth is good the solution runs well."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution."
"Overall, my experience with the solution is very positive, and I rate it a 9 out of 10."
"The best point about IBM Storage Protect is that it can use IBM tape environments, which we still use and will continue to use in the future."
"The tool's backup engine is very powerful. Previously, our client finished backup with HPE product in 48 hours. IBM Storage Protect completes backup in 8 hours."
 

Cons

"Sometimes a server will get a bit behind. ​"
"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening. If there is an issue, I would like to know what the problem is. Right now, we have to depend on the support of the vendor to check and let us know, because we don't have access to a lot of logging information."
"Since I have to view everything on the console, the previous application solutions like IBM and Sanavi showed the RPO and RTO status directly. In AWS Disaster Recovery Service, these details are not available, making it difficult to check my replication status."
"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."
"The cost of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is seen as expensive."
"Since I have to view everything on the console, the previous application solutions like IBM and Sanavi showed the RPO and RTO status directly. In AWS Disaster Recovery Service, these details are not available, making it difficult to check my replication status."
"The user interface, customer support, and the recovery time for the current customer query could use improvement."
"In its current state, ECL integrates with CloudWatch for basic logging and monitoring, yet improvements could include more detailed logs for specific actions, like when I perform actions such as push or pull."
"The product should improve its GUI. It should also support Windows clustering."
"The solution is expensive."
"Some features are outdated as the product does not use the latest technologies. The graphical user interface, known as the operation center, is not very well designed. Additionally, IBM Storage Protect does not work well with virtual environments such as VMware and Hyper-V."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is charging clients $20 to do the DR backups. It is an expensive solution."
"I feel the product's pricing is a good value. Licensing is pretty straightforward."
"The pricing is better now that they had come out with the Tier 2 which replicates a little less often. In comparison to what I would have been spending with any other type of solution, the pricing is fair."
"They license us on a per machine basis. We have a set number of machines, which we have licensed.​"
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"We were happy with the pricing that they gave us."
"I rate the price of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery a six out of ten."
"Where the price adds up, there are CloudEndure licenses, then there is the AWS environment, and finally, there is the AWS storage, so cumulatively, it adds up."
"IBM Storage Protect is not expensive and fits the needs of all business types. The licensing is based on a capacity-based model. You can take a license for one, two, or three terabytes."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
847,646 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
12%
Healthcare Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
25%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 setup is actually managed by our partner. I have taken a rate of per user. Licensing is completely managed by the partner. I am paying per user and per GB storage cost, while the infrastructure...
What needs improvement with CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
In its current state, ECL integrates with CloudWatch for basic logging and monitoring, yet improvements could include more detailed logs for specific actions, like when I perform actions such as pu...
What do you like most about IBM Storage Protect?
The best point about IBM Storage Protect is that it can use IBM tape environments, which we still use and will continue to use in the future.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Storage Protect?
IBM Storage Protect is generally an expensive tool. However, with good contracts with IBM or its partners, the cost might not be so high. New customers can expect very high prices.
What needs improvement with IBM Storage Protect?
Some features are outdated as the product does not use the latest technologies. The graphical user interface, known as the operation center, is not very well designed. Additionally, IBM Storage Pro...
 

Also Known As

CloudEndure Disaster Recovery
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agio, Cloud Nation, Limelight Networks
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. IBM Storage Protect and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
847,646 professionals have used our research since 2012.