Azure Site Recovery vs OpenText Recover comparison

Microsoft and OpenText are both solutions in the Disaster Recovery (DR) Software category. Additionally, 92% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Azure Site Recovery

Read 26 Azure Site Recovery reviews

2,541 Views
889 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

OpenText Recover

Read 1 OpenText Recover review

152 Views
112 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Azure Site Recovery

OpenText Recover

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and OpenText Recover based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Zerto, VMware and others in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software.

To learn more, read our detailed Disaster Recovery (DR) Software Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 861,524 peers since 2012

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

Azure Site Recovery

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Disaster Recovery as a Service (3rd)

OpenText Recover

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

8.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (24th)

Featured Reviews

RituparnaBhattacharya

Senior Infrastructure Engineer at MIC Global

The time-saving aspects allow us to write PowerShell scripts to automate failover processes

First of all, we initially faced a challenge as Azure Site Recovery was not supporting shared disk options on SQL clusters with VMs, which are important for a Windows cluster mode. Additionally, the setup is quite easy, only requiring the creation of a vault. Its time-saving aspects allow us to write PowerShell scripts to automate failover processes.

Read full review

Rias Majeed

CTO at Exceed NetSec LLC

Allows you to test and schedule recovery tasks for multiple sites

The main weakness of Carbonite Recover is the fallback process, which can be time-consuming. However, the failover process works well when done properly. Similar to other software programs, there was a technical issue involving duplicates and small glitches. Over time, Carbonite recovery has improved. When I started working with Cyber, we had to double-check everything, and although it was challenging, the downtime wasn't extensive—one incident in a year, for example. Restoring data with Carbonite Recover can take time, mainly because the backup process occurs in real time. The main concern is the duration needed to restore data to the primary environment, which can be lengthy. However, once the failover is complete, there are no further issues.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution is secure, reliable, and scalable."

"A major benefit is that you do not want to pay any more for huge costs to build a DR site."

"The setup is quite easy, just requiring the creation of a vault."

"Azure Site Recovery's automated file synchronization was a game-changer in managing legacy systems."

"It is a very stable product and very scalable."

"Azure Site Recovery helps to save costs."

"Azure Site Recovery is obviously a time-saving solution, and I can write PowerShell scripts to automate failover on or off processes."

"The solution is very easy to use."

More Azure Site Recovery pros

"We confirm the server failure before initiating recovery. Once started, this process takes half an hour to an hour, though it can be as fast as 15 minutes. After bringing up the server, we test connectivity to ensure everything is operational."

Cons

"Currently, Azure Site Recovery does not support shared disk options. Moreover, it does not support services like AppConfig or App Services."

"Site Recovery's scalability could be improved."

"The support team took a lot of time to respond and was not very professional."

"We need to be able to move the virtual servers and not build and then port them across. They need to improve the hypervisor."

"It could include more of a backup and recovery."

"It is for site-to-site replication. When something goes wrong on your site, you only get 15 minutes before it also goes wrong on your replicated site. There should be some way to be able to say that we want to restore it, but we want to restore it to the version from yesterday. It should support versioning. I would also like to see real-time scanning for advanced threat protection, more straightforward billing, and quicker turnaround on the tech support."

"It would be good if we could replicate the solution to multiple locations simultaneously because we are currently allowed to replicate to just a single location."

"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."

More Azure Site Recovery cons

"The main weakness of Carbonite Recover is the fallback process, which can be time-consuming. However, the failover process works well when done properly. Similar to other software programs, there was a technical issue involving duplicates and small glitches."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Azure Site Recovery is a very reasonably priced product."

"They have a license to pay."

"Azure Site Recovery is neither very expensive nor very cheap."

"It should have more straightforward billing. The billing was what got funky. It was really cheap. We would pay based on the usage. We paid around $225 a month for site-to-site replication."

"The tool is expensive. What is expensive to me might not be expensive to you. As I mentioned, we seek ways to reduce our costs. If the price goes down, that would be great. I rate the tool's pricing a six out of ten."

"I'm not sure about the Azure Site Recovery pricing, but my organization gets monthly bills from providers."

"The tool's licensing is yearly and not expensive."

"Azure Site Recovery is affordable."

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Site Recovery?

A major advantage is that you do not want to pay any more for huge costs to build a DR site. It is very flexible and will save your cost.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Azure Site Recovery?

The flexibility of Azure Site Recovery regarding integration with different IT environments is limited; it is purely an Azure platform service for business continuity, not meant for integration wit...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Carbonite Recover?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Carbonite Recover?

Carbonite Recover is an effective tool for testing and scheduling recovery tasks for multiple sites, whether they have primary servers or virtual machines. You can schedule jobs for recovery at the...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Carbonite Recover?

Carbonite Recover is a downtime reduction solution that minimizes the time employees cannot work. Carbonite Recover can accurately measure how much potential productivity or revenue is saved per ho...

See all answers

Comparisons

HPE Zerto Software vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 19% of the time

VMware Live Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 16% of the time

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 15% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 15% of the time

Rubrik vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 8% of the time

More Azure Site Recovery Competitors

VMware Live Recovery vs OpenText Recover

Compared 100% of the time

More OpenText Recover Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Site Recovery

July 2025

Download Azure Site Recovery product report

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software

June 2025

Download OpenText Recover product report

Overview

Help your business to keep doing business - even during major IT outages. Azure Site Recovery offers ease of deployment, cost effectiveness, and dependability. Deploy replication, failover, and recovery processes through Site Recovery to help keep your applications running during planned and unplanned outages. Site Recovery is a native disaster recovery as a service (DRaaS), and Microsoft been recognized as a leader in DRaaS based on completeness of vision and ability to execute by Gartner in the 2018 Magic Quadrant for Disaster Recovery as a Service.

Microsoft

OpenText Recover offers businesses a robust data protection solution, ensuring continuity and data recovery across key infrastructures.

With OpenText Recover, organizations are empowered with reliable recovery measures that protect mission-critical data, featuring seamless integration across various platforms. The technology aligns with industry's best practices, delivering comprehensive safeguards that enhance resilience.

What are the key features of OpenText Recover?

Automated Backups: Streamlines data protection with scheduled backups to minimize manual intervention.
Disaster Recovery: Provides rapid restoration of essential data in emergency scenarios, reducing downtime.
Cloud Support: Integrates easily with cloud infrastructures, offering flexible storage options.
Scalability: Adapts to growing enterprise data needs, maintaining performance efficiencies.

What benefits or ROI should users consider?

Cost Efficiency: Minimizes expenses related to data loss and extended downtime.
Operational Continuity: Ensures business processes remain uninterrupted during data incidents.
Compliance Support: Helps meet data protection regulations through comprehensive security measures.
Enhanced Reliability: Delivers consistent and dependable recovery services, boosting trust in infrastructure.

OpenText Recover is widely implemented across industries like finance, healthcare, and telecommunications. It supports data integrity and swift recovery in financial systems, ensures patient data is safeguarded in healthcare, and helps telecom providers maintain uninterrupted services. The diverse applications make it a versatile tool in maintaining critical operations.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software

June 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Zerto, VMware and others in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Disaster Recovery (DR) Software vendors.

We monitor all Disaster Recovery (DR) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.