Zerto Reviews

Meets all the ticks when looking for a Disaster Recovery Product/Service. Low RPO exceptional RTS. Integrates directly with vCentre Server. Easy to use.

Needs better reporting.

Improved the DR RPO and BCP.

VMware VM replication over narrow WAN bandwidth.

It needs to support more public cloud, especially in China.

Less than one year.

No stability issues so far.

No scalability issues so far.

Excellent.

No previous solution.

Very simple.

It's a little bit expensive.

Tested several other products such as NAKIVO, Veeam, VM Replication. Zerto proved to have better replication efficiency over WAN bandwidth.

It works only for a virtual platform, it does not support bare metal. If you're looking for a comprehensive solution for both virtual and physical platforms, then Veeam is a preferable solution.

• Interoperability between Hyper-V, ESX, vCloud, and AWS.
• Very easy to use
• Reliable
• Fast
• Also the architecture (on the ISP side) is designed with isolation and multi-tenancy in mind, so it's safely deployable on an ISP environment.

It allows smooth migrations which would be a lot more difficult with other technologies.

• A "manual mode" which would allow the user to failover the VMs but keeping them powered off at destination

• More powerful scripting engine

• Ability to move protected VMs between VPGs
• More reliable ETA on VPG syncronization
• root-level user for VRA installation ( at the moment the user "root" is hardcoded )
• Bandwidth throttling schedule should include days of week

I've used it for four months.

Not at all.

There were no issues.

There were no issues.

Customer Service:

Great pre-sales experience, and good support.

Technical Support:

8/10.

It was pretty straightforward.

I love the application, and it has become essential in my work.

• Journal: ZVR uses a journal of history changes. Whenever you need to failover a VM or group of VMs, you have the ability to choose a Point in Time to which those replicas should be switched. For instance, if a disaster occurs at 10:05:00, you can failover with replicas to 10:04:55.

• Consistency Groups: If you replicate groups of VMs, then during failover, all of the VMs in groups are failed over to the exact same point in time.

• Resiliency: ZVR is resilient to Zerto infrastructure component restarts and loss of connection between sites which are automatically handled. The ZVR is very lightweight it doesn't use snapshots and has close to zero impact on production VMs and many others. It lets you get your files from Windows based VMs without failing over to replica VMs.

Before ZVR, we had many limitations in case of protecting production VMs during working hours. This primarily came from frequent VM snapshots impacting users. ZVR lets us protect our VMs without any impact upon users and greatly improved our RPOs from hours to seconds.

I would like to see a couple of details regarding awareness of VM events coming outside of ZVR. This could be a user reverting VM back to an older snapshot, which can sometimes screw up the replica, but nothing major besides it is affected.

We have used this solution for over three years.

There were no issues with deployment.

There were no issues with stability.

ZVR can handle thousands of VMs, so there were issues with scalability here.

Support is very quick in their response time and most of issues are solved in a matter of hours.

We were using Veeam Replication which is based on snapshots. However, ZVR has no snaphosts, zero impact on production, and improves RPOs seamlessly.

The initial setup was very straightforward and can be done in less than one hour. You can then start replicating between two sites.

We did the implementation in-house.

Licensing is based on the number of VMs to replicate. The first thing should be to get the number of VMs to replicate based on your business needs.

Before ZVR, I evaluated Veeam Replication, vSphere Replication, and RecoverPoint for VMs.

If you need to replicate your VMs with RPOs of seconds, then Zerto is certainly the way to go.

It is easy to setup and manage.

Provides a simple interface for VM DR.

Needs compatibility with multi-tiered applications, such as Sharepoint, for testing.

One to two years.

No.

No.

Fair, depending on which location you get in contact with: They can be difficult to deal with and don't understand the product in which they are servicing.

Not applicable.

It is very straightforward. A simple wizard to install.

I didn't personally deal with the licensing structure.

You should evaluate Site Recovery Manager by VMware. It is more expensive, but works better.

Ensure you run an evaluation and test failovers to verify it will meet your individualized needs.

Hardware-Independent Simple configuration Easy installation Integrated with vCenter Server and vCloud Director Very low RPOs

Poor documentation Poor reporting engine Bugs with rollback procedures

Allows for semi-synchronic replication, even though it's hardware independent.