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

Azure Site Recovery vs Druva Phoenix comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 14, 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

Azure Site Recovery
Ranking in Disaster Recovery as a Service
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Druva Phoenix
Ranking in Disaster Recovery as a Service
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Backup (16th), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (11th), SaaS Backup (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Disaster Recovery as a Service category, the mindshare of Azure Site Recovery is 23.5%, down from 25.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Druva Phoenix is 2.6%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Disaster Recovery as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

RituparnaBhattacharya - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Ratnodeep Roy - PeerSpot reviewer
Patch-based system, offers network flexibility but Logs are not very informative for regular users
The ransomware features are limited in Druva. There's a lot of improvement needed. It should extend to Nutanix and Hyper-V. It should extend to Azure as well. A lot of people are looking for ransomware scans, but Druva doesn't support them. Veeam barely supports them over Azure Virtual Machines. It doesn't support Linux Virtual Machines. NetApp and Commvault don't have such features. Acronis is also limited. In Azure, you have Azure Defender, but that works extensively on cloud storage, not on the servers. So, backup companies like Druva need to work a lot on ransomware protection and detection. These companies need to work a lot on ransomware detection, protection and more. Ransomware protection doesn't work in this hash-based transfer mirroring. If I only have to find this hash and feed it to the Druva end. It's sometimes not possible. It will struggle when the workloads are more than a hundred machines. It's not possible to find the hash of each file and provide it to Druva. So, this needs to be fully automated. If I were scanning with some technology, maybe signature-based scanning, behavioral-based, or keyword-based scanning. I can put this FHA, maybe SIEMs as well. But Druva is very limited. It's already in an active stage. I don't like that they don't extend all the features to all the workloads. These features are minimal compared to those of its competitors. For instance, I have one customer who was looking for Druva, but since they have Azure machines, they couldn't find a way to restore a particular file. Druva doesn't provide Azure virtual machine single file restore. It doesn't make sense to build a product and then it doesn't support it. Customers really struggle. Some customers tried Druva so that they don't have to think about setting up a separate network, but Druva is making things critical by not providing all the things at once and gradually releasing them. It's been more than six months or one year since they started their virtual machines, but there is no single file restore. Every time you have to restore the VM, and then from there, you can get the file. Why would people go with Druva if they have to manage backup machines? Nowadays, backup product companies need to be aggressive and adopt themselves in this highly changing world of AI and ML.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Azure Site Recovery's automated file synchronization was a game-changer in managing legacy systems."
"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."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"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."
"We use the tool for business continuity purposes."
"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."
"It's patch-based, so you don't have to bother about the backup server or the repository."
"I would definitively say that we have been able to make our people more productive by at least 30%."
"Druva Phoenix is easy to use and easy to start with."
"I found the cost-effectiveness of Druva Phoenix to be its most valuable feature, especially when compared to on-premises backup solutions."
"The most valuable features of Druva Phoenix are the simple portal to log in and flexibility."
"Once you set it up and you tell it exactly what needs to be backed up, you literally forget about it. It sends you emails and notifications of the current status of the jobs."
"The initial setup was very straightforward."
 

Cons

"The immutable backup could be better."
"It could include more of a backup and recovery."
"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."
"In the newest version of Azure Site Recovery, the configuration was a little more complex, so this is an area for improvement."
"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The solution needs to improve replication and failover processes. We are still looking for improvements in the cost baseline."
"I conveyed the feedback to the agent, suggesting an increase in the agent count in our VNS in the USA. I also addressed notification concerns, as some issues didn't trigger alerts during a recent call."
"The product's pricing needs to be improved."
"They were able to give us a very reasonable price considering we were non-for-profit organizations, however, there is always room for improvement on that cost."
"The ransomware features are limited in Druva. There's a lot of improvement needed. It should extend to Nutanix and Hyper-V. It should extend to Azure as well."
"Druva Phoenix should include a few reporting features that it doesn't provide currently."
"There is room for improvement in the reporting aspect of Druva Phoenix."
"Druva Phoenix is optimized to work with x86 platforms, making it unsuitable for backing up non-x86 architectures like AIX. The solution is primarily designed for physical Linux and Windows systems based on the x86 architecture, as well as virtualized Windows and Linux environments. However, if you have an AIX system, it cannot be deployed in the cloud, and therefore, backing it up in the cloud is not a concern."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 neither very expensive nor very cheap."
"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."
"Azure Site Recovery is affordable."
"Azure Site Recovery is a very reasonably priced product."
"I assume clients use Druva Phoenix because it is cheaper than other products."
"It's very costly. Normal people wouldn't understand how their credits are calculated. It's pretty complex."
"Druva Phoenix's pricing is based on the service provided, and it's reasonable. The cost of the service will depend on the size of your data and the number of virtual machines being backed up. However, the pricing structure is straightforward and easy to understand."
"We’ve had experience with the data center for a while and we have had solutions that were able to support older versions of the operating systems that we needed. I would like for Druva to support it as well."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
841,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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.
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...
What do you like most about Druva Phoenix?
Druva Phoenix is easy to use and easy to start with.
What needs improvement with Druva Phoenix?
The product's pricing needs to be improved. Including more flexible feature sets such as options for sending secondary backups to different locations would be beneficial.
What is your primary use case for Druva Phoenix?
We utilized the product to modernize backup as a service, eliminating the need for extensive hardware and ensuring data is securely backed off-site.
 

Also Known As

No data available
CloudRanger
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace
TRC Companies, Family Health Network, GulfMark Offshore, Pall Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Site Recovery vs. Druva Phoenix and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
841,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.