Find out in this report how the two Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
Azure Site Recovery is time-saving, and its features allow us to automate processes and save resources.
The return on investment is evident, as Zerto saves more than 60 percent of time in various operations compared to the previous manual processes.
Most people like me hope we never have to use it. It is like insurance.
Having seen the product and how it works and its reliability, it seems it will pay for itself.
We primarily rely on our Cloud Support Partner for support.
I have never had an issue that was not resolved, and I have never been in a situation where they did not respond.
I would give them a rating of ten because it represents the highest level of support based on the technical knowledge of the support team, response time, and effectiveness of the provided resolutions.
We receive support around the clock, which is excellent.
I would rate it a ten out of ten for scalability.
By adding more hosts and installing VRAs on each, tasks can be efficiently managed.
I would rate Zerto a ten out of ten for scalability.
I would rate the stability of Azure Site Recovery at eight to nine out of ten.
I promptly delete the malfunctioning elements and set them up again to resume replication, ensuring stability.
I consulted with tech support, and we determined the solution was to move the main workload to a resource-available ESX box.
It is 100% stable.
Currently, Azure Site Recovery does not support shared disk options.
If I have 350 objects that I am protecting, I would like Zerto to be able to fire them up in one order, rather than having to manually bring them up in a sequence.
To increase accessibility for small and medium businesses, Zerto should consider a competitive pricing strategy, possibly including subscription-based licensing options.
The main issue with Zerto is its user interface, which lacks flexibility and presents a steep learning curve.
If you want a good-quality tool that is robust and does a good job for you, you have to pay a higher price to get that, and Zerto is no different.
However, it can become quite expensive when you start looking at the number of workloads you have in the environment and what you would like to do.
One of Zerto's main disadvantages is its pricing structure, which involves significant upfront costs and limited options for startups with minimal initial funding.
Its time-saving aspects allow us to write PowerShell scripts to automate failover processes.
Zerto offers excellent technical support with responsive and helpful experts.
If we were attacked, I could revert to a backup from five seconds before the attack, and no one would know we were attacked.
The replication time and the minor amount of time it takes to sync a new server outside of any of my huge 40-terabyte boxes is ridiculously quick.
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.
Zerto is used for disaster recovery, business continuity, data migration, and ransomware recovery, providing continuous data protection and near real-time replication. Valued for ease of use, efficient failover processes, and versatile integration, it enhances organizational efficiency, reduces errors, and boosts productivity.
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.
