We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and Rubrik based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
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."We use the tool for business continuity purposes."
"Our primary use case is for disaster recovery and business continuity and disaster recovery (BCDR)."
"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."
"Azure Site Recovery is an easy-to-use and fairly stable solution for disaster 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 I love about Azure Site Recovery is its simplicity for basic configurations."
"Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"Azure Site Recovery's automated file synchronization was a game-changer in managing legacy systems."
"Instant recovery is a good feature."
"Rubrik has made the process to manage backup and recovery painless. This frees up more time to work on other projects."
"The feature that I found most valuable is Live Mount. You can either mount a virtual machine from a snapshot, or you can mount a volume from the snapshot. You can mount one disk to the server to retrieve data, or you can mount the whole VM, rename it, and use it as a test VM. If your VM gets corrupted, you just mount one from the snapshot, and you have your production VM's backup. So, Live Mount is definitely the best feature for me as an end-user."
"Rubrik can also serve as a secondary host for emergency recoveries."
"This is a centralized tool where we are able to schedule backups and perform monitoring."
"Instant recovery because it takes about 10 seconds to restore the VM from backup to production"
"The security and the ransomware protection are most valuable."
"Time dedicated to backup was drastically reduced."
"Site Recovery's scalability could be improved."
"I would like to see more security features."
"The primary area for improvement in Azure Site Recovery is its pricing."
"When it runs, it runs well but when it doesn't run, the solution needs to make it clearer as to why and what the troubleshooting process is. All this would be possible if the error logging was streamlined a bit."
"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 performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"It would be good if we could replicate the solution to multiple locations simultaneously because we are currently allowed to replicate to just a single location."
"Azure Site Recovery's deployment is complex. There are a lot of bugs, and it needs to improve stability."
"I would like to have a built-in index searching ability of files/system files within the Rubrik interface to determine if a file or item exists, rather than just recovering it, and then doing a search for the file afterwards."
"Global management of multiple systems is lacking, as is reporting across multiple installed units."
"It would be nice if they could work on the pricing a bit."
"There is room for improvement in pricing. After the licensing, the price tends to go up as time goes by."
"The main pain points we experienced was the stability of the system. We received a lot of instability when we have upgraded from a certain version to a new version. The newer version was completely filled with bugs and we needed to purge the system every week until we update to a newer version that was available one year later. The stability of the code is the main problem, they need to make it better."
"It needs more storage array integration options and an easier restore for files that download using a browser."
"The interface is still slightly clunky and has room for improvement. They do work with us whenever we mention anything that needs to be done or anything that we want. We find that bringing up the management interface is a little slow and not as intuitive as we would like, but it's been getting better as it evolves."
"Needs integration with video CD (coming in the next release) and a multi-tenant GUI."
Azure Site Recovery is ranked 1st in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 19 reviews while Rubrik is ranked 4th in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software with 83 reviews. Azure Site Recovery is rated 8.2, while Rubrik is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Azure Site Recovery writes "Useful for restoration purposes that ensures that the users get to save a lot of time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rubrik writes "Easy to use with minimal training required, innovative, good support". Azure Site Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Zerto, VMware SRM, AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and Datto Cloud Continuity, whereas Rubrik is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Cohesity DataProtect, Commvault Cloud, Zerto and Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain). See our Azure Site Recovery vs. Rubrik report.
See our list of best Disaster Recovery (DR) Software vendors.
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.
