No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Azure Site Recovery vs OpenText Recover​ comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure Site Recovery
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Disaster Recovery as a Service (3rd)
OpenText Recover​
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (36th)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2142519 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Long-term user praises cost savings and reliability of disaster recovery solutions
There is only one thing to note: the agent has to be up-to-date when SCCM or any third-party tools are doing patching activities. If their agent version is mismatched and the health status is critical, you will not be able to perform your Azure Site Recovery. Recently, I worked with a mass issue related to Recovery Services Vault, and the VM support engineers are taking a lot of time to extend support to the customer. When you raise a call, they wait too long, and even if you request an engineer to set up a call for severity B cases, they are not ready to communicate over the phone, preferring email instead.
Rias Majeed - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"The features I find most valuable in Azure Site Recovery include the test failover, which allows us to test our site recovery without bringing down the primary; disaster recovery provides that feature."
"The setup is quite easy, just requiring the creation of a vault."
"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."
"Our primary use case is for disaster recovery and business continuity and disaster recovery (BCDR)."
"It’s native to Azure and does exactly what it’s designed to do—recover one site to another without creating all the VMs on that site. This helps reduce costs on the secondary site."
"Azure Site Recovery's automated file synchronization was a game-changer in managing legacy systems."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"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've invested nearly 20 million pounds in Azure and it's been an absolute disaster for us."
"There is room for improvement in the release of patches, such as ensuring they are properly managed to avoid outages."
"Recently, I worked with a mass issue related to Recovery Services Vault, and the VM support engineers are taking a lot of time to extend support to the customer."
"It could include more of a backup and recovery."
"Site Recovery's scalability could be improved."
"There have been issues with replication. It would be helpful if error logging was handled more effectively."
"We need to be able to move the virtual servers and not build and then port them across. They need to improve the hypervisor."
"Could have more integration with other platforms."
"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

"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."
"Azure Site Recovery is a very reasonably priced product."
"They have a license to pay."
"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."
"The tool's licensing is yearly and not expensive."
"Azure Site Recovery is affordable."
"Azure Site Recovery is neither very expensive nor very cheap."
"I'm not sure about the Azure Site Recovery pricing, but my organization gets monthly bills from providers."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Construction Company
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise14
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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.
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...
What is your primary use case for Azure Site Recovery?
My main use case for Azure Site Recovery is that we are doing cross-region disaster recovery and processing.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Veeam Software, Broadcom and others in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.