Azure Site Recovery vs Carbonite 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 24 Azure Site Recovery reviews

1,089 Views
801 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

Carbonite Recover

Read 1 Carbonite Recover review

91 Views
61 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Azure Site Recovery

Carbonite Recover

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

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

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

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

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 849,190 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

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Disaster Recovery as a Service (2nd)

Carbonite Recover

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

8.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (35th)

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 most useful thing is that it provides a snapshot of your environment in about 15 minutes. It is stable, and it always works. It is also scalable and easy to set up."

"The documentation is good, and it can be integrated with other products."

"Azure Site Recovery is an easy-to-use and fairly stable solution for disaster recovery."

"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 secure, reliable, and scalable."

"What I love about Azure Site Recovery is its simplicity for basic configurations."

"We use the solution across hospitality and healthcare domains. We use it for custom development. It helps us develop a seamless omnichannel for the healthcare industry."

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

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

"we lack a straightforward method to automate the restart of services, which can be quite time-consuming."

"One area for improvement with Azure is helping customers predict usage more accurately."

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

"There is room for improvement in the release of patches, such as ensuring they are properly managed to avoid outages."

"The system did go down a couple of times, which impacted our operations. For stability, I would rate it a seven out of ten."

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

"Azure Site Recovery's deployment is complex. There are a lot of bugs, and it needs to improve stability."

"Azure Site Recovery does not support shared disk options."

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 affordable."

"They have a license to pay."

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

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

"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."

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

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

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

849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

13%

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?

The pricing of Azure Site Recovery is around a four out of ten, being somewhat cost-effective. Microsoft frequently restructures their pricing, causing us to adjust packages and subscriptions, whic...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Azure Site Recovery?

There is room for improvement in the release of patches, such as ensuring they are properly managed to avoid outages. The support help desk needs to improve escalation procedures. Azure ( /products...

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

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 18% of the time

Zerto vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 18% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 16% of the time

VMware Live Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 16% of the time

Rubrik vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 8% of the time

More Azure Site Recovery Competitors

VMware Live Recovery vs Carbonite Recover

Compared 100% of the time

More Carbonite Recover Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Site Recovery

April 2025

Download Azure Site Recovery product report

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software

April 2025

Download Carbonite 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

Carbonite Recover securely replicates critical systems from your primary environment to the Carbonite cloud. This ensures that an up-to-date secondary copy is available for failover at any moment, minimizing downtime as well as costs. You pay for what you use, when you use it - and not for idle resources.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software

April 2025

Download Free Report

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

849,190 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.