IBM Cloud Object Storage vs NetApp StorageGRID comparison

IBM and NetApp are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. IBM is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.8, while NetApp is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.2. IBM holds a 1.2% mindshare in FaOS, compared to NetApp’s 5.4% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 85% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

IBM Cloud Object Storage

Read 7 IBM Cloud Object Storage reviews

1,352 Views
869 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

NetApp StorageGRID

Read 13 NetApp StorageGRID reviews

3,246 Views
2,644 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

IBM Cloud Object Storage

NetApp StorageGRID

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

IBM Cloud Object Storage and NetApp StorageGRID compete in the scalable data storage solutions category. Data comparisons indicate IBM holds an advantage in pricing and support satisfaction, whereas NetApp excels with advanced features that justify the cost for many businesses.

Features: IBM Cloud Object Storage offers comprehensive elasticity, efficient cost management, and integrated AI capabilities for enhanced data analytics. It is particularly suitable for dynamic storage needs. NetApp StorageGRID provides rich metadata management, policy-driven data placement, and seamless hybrid cloud integration, making it appealing for enterprises prioritizing versatility.

Room for Improvement: IBM Cloud Object Storage could improve in areas such as user interface customization, extended support for third-party integrations, and more flexible data migration options. NetApp StorageGRID may benefit from streamlining setup processes, enhancing user training resources, and reducing initial deployment complexity.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM ensures straightforward deployment with robust customer service, allowing rapid integration with existing systems. NetApp StorageGRID requires a more structured setup, benefiting organizations needing detailed data distribution capabilities. IBM is generally favored for its responsive support and service reliability.

Pricing and ROI: IBM delivers competitive initial setup costs with a solid ROI due to efficient scalability and low-cost management. NetApp StorageGRID may incur higher setup expenses but provides superior ROI through strategic data lifecycle management, which is advantageous for businesses focusing on long-term data handling efficiency. The choice depends on budget and strategic goals.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID Report (Updated: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID

January 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

IBM Cloud Object Storage

Ranking in File and Object Storage

12th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

NetApp StorageGRID

Ranking in File and Object Storage

7th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of IBM Cloud Object Storage is 1.2%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp StorageGRID is 5.4%, up from 4.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage

Featured Reviews

Steve Qualls

Senior Storage Engineer at Q & Q IT Consulting

Offers the ease with which you can move data between on-premises storage and the cloud and then retrieve it back on-premises when necessary

IBM Cloud Object Storage supports big data and analytics workflows. However, I usually have to refer to my documentation for that. Cloud environments are part of almost every project I've been involved in over the last few years, but I rely heavily on documentation whenever I need to do anything in the cloud. I know the basics, but the technical details always need refreshing. I create the drawings or diagrams of how the on-premises and cloud environments interact. So, visual representations are helpful. I'll diagram the on-premises environment, the cloud environment, and any appliances in between and then work from there. The integration capabilities simplified our data workflows. Like, the integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments.

Read full review

Mir Gulzar Ahmed

IT Manager at Synergy Computers

Object-based storage and offers intuitive management tools, making it easy to configure and maintain

The only thing missing is flexibility in configuration to cater to specific customer requirements. Another area of improvement is marketing. NetApp's marketing of StorageGRID isn't optimal. They should present it more effectively, especially in regions like Pakistan. Here, I haven't seen any marketing campaigns from NetApp for StorageGRID or the Solid State Platform (SSP). While StorageGRID is a globally recognized product, I haven't seen any marketing efforts from NetApp in Pakistan. Even competitors are promoting object storage solutions here, but NetApp seems less efficient in selling StorageGRID. There might be one or two customers, but even as a NetApp partner, I'm not aware of any major sales. I've been trained on StorageGRID, and it is a good product. I'm unsure why it hasn't gained traction in Pakistan compared to other countries. So, I just recommend improving the marketing campaigns in Pakistan. I'm pretty confident that if we have one example of successful StorageGRID implementation in Pakistan, other customers will follow suit.

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 integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments."

"IBM has the most number of additional services, this is the main advantage."

"One of Cloud Object Storage's best features is infinite capacity. This is one of the main advantages if you don't want to use your own storage. You also have the ability to write only, write once, and read many. It's like tape storage but software-based. This feature is essential for financial institutions that require that kind of protection if you write backup or data there."

"The most valuable feature I like is when you connect it via CLI plug-in...It is a stable solution."

"IBM Cloud Object Storage integrates well."

"The standout feature of IBM Cloud Object Storage is its top-notch security, making it ideal for sensitive applications like mobile financial transactions."

"The most valuable feature is tiering."

"It improves our operational efficiency."

"The implementation with NetApp went smoothly. It is a 'setup and forget' type of appliance."

"The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to restore data compared to our previous methods."

"The technical support is good."

"Right now, we have an older StorageGRID. I like that we can grow it."

"It has improved our operational efficiency through time consumption and logistics by 40 to 50 percent. Everything that had to do with our legacy tape solution has been improved and is now more efficient."

"Duplication, interface and the manageability is good and simple."

More NetApp StorageGRID pros

Cons

"IBM Cloud storage is not cheap, but it could be."

"IBM has limited cloud storage."

"The performance could improve in IBM Cloud Object Storage. The throughput or objects per second can have degradation."

"One area where IBM Cloud Object Storage could potentially improve is in modernizing its underlying codebase."

"One improvement could be incorporating a feature similar to Dropbox's version history. This would allow users to track modifications made to files over time, which is particularly important for maintaining a record of changes. While the free version might not include this feature, it could be included in the paid version to provide added value to clients. Additionally, having a version history feature that allows users to access modifications made to files over the past three months could be beneficial."

"The performance could be better. It isn't bad, but everything is network-based, so you have a performance penalty on the network. You can never achieve the same performance as hardware. That's the disadvantage of cloud storage solutions in general. Cloud performance is one of the main issues clients have."

"If I had to choose one area, it would be making the consoles more intuitive would be helpful. Sometimes, they can be a little complicated if you're not familiar with them."

"The integration with more apps has room for improvement."

"Beyond the initial setup, this product is a little bit difficult to configure."

"We want to move towards Azure in the cloud. Right now, the system is all physical."

"The only real issue that we have run into is, when we are cloning, we cannot do a thin provision clone, it has to be a full clone."

"The product's continual innovation and enhancement in integration capabilities with other NetApp solutions could be better."

"Improvements need to be made in the support area."

"It has its quirks here and there, but it is an older NetApp system."

"I just recommend improving the marketing campaigns in Pakistan."

More NetApp StorageGRID cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"IBM Cloud is cheaper than AWS. If you want to scale your cloud infrastructure, it can be bought at almost the same price."

"You have the option of a monthly or yearly license. Most customers choose the monthly option. I understand what you would like to say. IBM also lets you choose among four types of Cloud Object Storage. The difference is usage, performance, etc. Of course, high-performance storage is more expensive, while low-performance storage is for cold data, and it's really cheap."

"Like most cloud providers, IBM likely charges based on storage capacity, typically per gigabyte or terabyte. Their pricing is competitive when compared to AWS or Microsoft."

"Pricing is not cheap."

"While we have been able to save money on storage costs, it could be better."

"We chose NetApp because of price and performance."

"We save money on storage costs from this solution since it allows us to have a source of revenue from customers consuming the service."

"The pricing of StorageGRID falls within the typical range for enterprise-grade solutions and is comparable to other vendors such as Dell, NetApp, and Pure Storage."

"NetApp is not known for being the cheapest storage option on the market. Almost all of the other storage options we looked at were less expensive than StorageGRID. The price is one thing to criticize, which is what we hear internally and from customers as well. They find the cost of the terabytes in this class of storage a little bit higher than expected."

"Creating your own data stores, backups, or storage grids, helps eliminate all these costs of downloading all the data back after you downloaded to the cloud."

"The licensing that the S3 service provides them from a FabricPool standpoint is more attractive than the licensing from AWS or Azure."

"Buying the solution is expensive, but it saves you money down the line when you factor in the logistics of not having to buy tapes."

More NetApp StorageGRID pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Educational Organization

41%

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

21%

Manufacturing Company

20%

Computer Software Company

17%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Cloud Object Storage?

The integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Cloud Object Storage?

Like most cloud providers, IBM likely charges based on storage capacity, typically per gigabyte or terabyte. Their pricing is competitive when compared to AWS or Microsoft. I don't believe it's sig...

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Object Storage?

All cloud environments have been pretty robust over the last few years. Of course, there's always room for improvement. If I had to choose one area, it would be making the consoles more intuitive w...

See all answers

What do you like most about NetApp StorageGRID?

The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to restore data compared to our previous methods.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp StorageGRID?

I rate the product pricing around five out of ten—it's negotiable, depending on the circumstances.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp StorageGRID?

The product's continual innovation and enhancement in integration capabilities with other NetApp solutions could be better.

See all answers

Comparisons

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 23% of the time

Dell ECS vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 23% of the time

MinIO vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 20% of the time

Cloudian HyperStore vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 6% of the time

Scality RING vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM Cloud Object Storage Competitors

MinIO vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 25% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 25% of the time

Dell ECS vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 24% of the time

Scality RING vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 7% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 2% of the time

More NetApp StorageGRID Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage

February 2025

Download IBM Cloud Object Storage product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID

February 2025

Download NetApp StorageGRID product report

Also Known As

Cleversafe

Storage GRID

Overview

IBM Cloud Object Storage is a web-scale platform that stores unstructured data - from petabyte to exabyte - with reliability, security, availability and disaster recovery without replication.

IBM

Store and manage unstructured data at scale using NetApp StorageGRID for secure, durable object storage. Place content in the right location, at the right time, and on the right storage tier, optimizing workflows and reducing overall costs for globally distributed rich media.

NetApp

Sample Customers

Bitly, Dreamstime, Prime Research

ASE, DARZ GmbH

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID

January 2025

Free Report: IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID report.

See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.

We monitor all File and Object Storage 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.