Azure Site Recovery vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP comparison

The compared Microsoft and NetApp solutions aren't in the same category. Microsoft is ranked #2 in DRS , with an average rating of 8.1, and holds a 22.1% mindshare in the category. NetApp is ranked #1 in CSDS , with an average rating of 9.0, and holds a 28.7% mindshare. Additionally, 91% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Azure Site Recovery

Read 22 Azure Site Recovery reviews

1,180 Views
902 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Read 62 NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP reviews

591 Views
349 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Azure Site Recovery

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Microsoft, Commvault and others in Disaster Recovery as a Service.

To learn more, read our detailed Disaster Recovery as a Service Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery as a Service

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 838,713 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

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Disaster Recovery as a Service (2nd)

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Migration (1st), Cloud Storage (1st), Cloud Backup (10th), Public Cloud Storage Services (5th), Cloud Software Defined Storage (1st)

Mindshare comparison

Azure Site Recovery and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Azure Site Recovery is designed for Disaster Recovery as a Service and holds a mindshare of 22.1%, down 25.2% compared to last year.
NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, on the other hand, focuses on Cloud Software Defined Storage, holds 28.7% mindshare, down 29.6% since last year.

Disaster Recovery as a Service

Cloud Software Defined Storage

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

Pramod-Talekar

Sr Service Engineer at Evolent Health

Allows customers to manage SAN and NAS data within a single storage solution

The tool's most valuable features are the SnapLock and SnapMirror features. If something goes wrong with the data, we can restore it. This isn't a mirror; we store data in different locations. If there's an issue on the primary site, we can retrieve data from the secondary site. Multiprotocol support in NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is beneficial because it allows customers to manage SAN and NAS data within a single storage solution. This feature eliminates the need to purchase different types of storage.

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

"What I like best about Azure Site Recovery is that it's easier to use because my organization already has Azure as an Active Directory solution."

"You can create automation to move workloads and redirect traffic to another region."

"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."

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

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

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

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

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

More Azure Site Recovery pros

"With NetApp, you can integrate malware scanning or malware protection. This is something valuable that is not offered in SaaS solutions typically."

"Another feature which gets a lot of attention in our environment is the File Services Solutions in the cloud, because it's a completely, fully-managed service. We don't have to take care of any updates, upgrades, or configurations."

"The Cloud Manager application that's on the NetApp cloud site is easy to use. You can set up and schedule replications from there, so you don't have to go into the ONTAP system. Another feature we've recently started using is the scheduled power off. We started with one client and have been slowly implementing it with others. We can cut costs by not having the VM run all the time. It's only on when it's doing replication, but it powers off after."

"Replication to the cloud is the most valuable feature. Deduplication and compression are also very important to us. We are in the process of adopting to the cloud. We are going to AWS and we are trying to do a safety technician call out with integration to the cloud. NetApp allows us to move some of the volume to the cloud, at the same time that we continue providing the cloud services that we have on premises."

"I like how you can easily pair on-prem with the cloud and the cloud backup feature. I like the whole integration with on-prem and the cloud for SnapMirror relationships."

"The initial setup was straightforward. We started with a small pilot and we then moved to production with no downtime at all."

"ONTAP is great for helping you migrate on-premise workflows to cloud environments."

"ONTAP has been very stable for us, specifically in the cloud environment. It allows us to have high availability as well as standalone systems if that's what we want within our specific workloads. Also, on-premise has been a very stable environment. We have very few outages and when we do, we work with support to get systems back online in a timely manner."

More NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP pros

Cons

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

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

"In the newest version of Azure Site Recovery, the configuration was a little more complex, so this is an area for improvement."

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

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

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

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

"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."

More Azure Site Recovery cons

"We've just been dealing with general pre-requisite infrastructure configuration challenges. Once those are out of the way, it is easy."

"Something we would like to see is the ability to better manage the setup and tie it to our configuration management database. We manage our whole IT infrastructure out of that database."

"Some of the licensing is a little kludgy. We just created an HA environment in Azure and their licensing for SVMs per node is a little kludgy. They're working on it right now."

"I would like this solution to be brought to all the three major players. Right now it's supported only on AWS and Azure. They should bring it to Google as well, because we would like to have flexibility in choosing the underlying cloud storage provider."

"It definitely needs improvement with respect to clustering and with respect to more collaborative integrations with Azure. Right now, we have very limited functionalities with Azure, except for storage. If CVO could be integrated with Azure that would help. When there is any sort of maintenance happening in the cloud, it disrupts the service in Cloud Volumes ONTAP."

"Scale-up and scale-out could be improved. It would be interesting to have multiple HA pairs on one cluster, for example, or to increase the single instances more, from a performance perspective. It would be good to get more performance out of a single HA pair."

"The integration wizard requires a bit of streamlining. There are small things that misconfigure or repeat the deployment that will create errors, specifically in Azure."

"In terms of improvement, I would like to see the Azure NetApp Files have the capability of doing SnapMirrors. Azure NetApp Files is, as we know, is an AFF system and it's not used in any of the Microsoft resources. It's basically NetApp hardware, so the best performance you can achieve, but the only reason we can't use that right now is because of the region that it's available in. The second was the SnapMirror capability that we didn't have that we heavily rely on right now."

More NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"They have a license to pay."

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

"Azure Site Recovery is affordable."

"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 a very reasonably priced product."

"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 know the licensing is a bit on the high-end. That's when we had to downsize our MetroCluster disks and just migrate to disks that were half used. We migrated into those just to reduce maintenance costs."

"The cost is quite high."

"They give us a good price for CVO licenses. It is one of the reasons that we went with the product."

"For NetApp it's about $20,000 for a single node and $30,000 for the HA."

"The pricing of this solution is definitely higher than what the typical Azure Files and AWS solutions charge, but given the features and the stability NetApp has provided, we are okay with it. We are not complaining about the pricing."

"It is not a cheap solution because we need to pay for the license and pay for Azure resources as well."

"Make sure you investigate what your requirements are going to cost you using the native cloud solutions versus what NetApp is going to cost you, to make sure you have a business case to go with NetApp."

"Cloud is cloud. It's still expensive. Any good solution comes with a price tag. That's where we are looking to see how well we can manage our data in the cloud by trying to optimize the costs."

More NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery as a Service solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Educational Organization

56%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

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.

See all answers

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

Its bit costly for long term use

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP?

So a lot of these licenses are at the rate that is required for capacity. So they're they're able to reduce the license consumption and also the consumption of the underlying cloud storage.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP?

The solution's pricing is reasonable.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP?

NetApp's support could improve.

See all answers

Comparisons

VMware Live Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 18% of the time

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 18% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 18% of the time

Zerto vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 17% of the time

More Azure Site Recovery Competitors

Azure NetApp Files vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Compared 14% of the time

Amazon S3 vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Compared 13% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Compared 11% of the time

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Compared 11% of the time

Portworx Enterprise vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Compared 7% of the time

More NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Site Recovery

February 2025

Download Azure Site Recovery product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

February 2025

Download NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP product report

Also Known As

No data available

ONTAP Cloud, CVO, NetApp CVO

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

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is an efficient storage management solution for managing and storing data in the cloud. It offers seamless integration with cloud providers, advanced data replication capabilities, and high data protection. With reliable performance, it is ideal for industries like healthcare and finance.

NetApp

Sample Customers

Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace

1. Accenture 2. Acer 3. Adidas 4. Aetna 5. AIG 6. Apple 7. Bank of America 8. Barclays 9. Bayer 10. Berkshire Hathaway 11. BNP Paribas 12. Cisco 13. Coca-Cola 14. Comcast 15.ConocoPhillips 16. CVS Health 17. Dell 18. Deutsche Bank 19. eBay 20. Eli Lilly 21. FedEx 22. Ford 23. Freescale Semiconductor 24. General Electric 25. Google 26. Honeywell 27. IBM 28. Intel 29. Intuit 30. JPMorgan Chase 31. Kellogg's 32. KeyCorp 33. Liberty Mutual 34. L'Oréal 35. Mastercard

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery as a Service

February 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Microsoft, Commvault and others in Disaster Recovery as a Service. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Disaster Recovery as a Service 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.