Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Azure Site Recovery Logo

Top 10 Azure Site Recovery Alternatives

Vendor: Microsoft
4.0 out of 5
Badge Leader
Start review

Top Azure Site Recovery Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Azure Site Recovery based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Commvault Cloud, VMware Live Recovery, and Nutanix Disaster Recovery as a Service. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions. Azure Site Recovery surpasses its competitors by offering seamless disaster recovery, automated protection, and application-consistent snapshots, ensuring critical application availability and simplifying business continuity through a reliable, scalable, and cost-effective infrastructure.

Microsoft Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Microsoft, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Azure Site Recovery Logo
Commvault Cloud
4.3 out of 5
Azure Site Recovery Logo
Commvault Cloud
4.3 out of 5
Commvault Cloud excels in comprehensive data management with strong backup features and flexibility in licensing. In comparison, Azure Site Recovery focuses on seamless disaster recovery within Azure environments, emphasizing cost-efficiency and integration simplicity, making it ideal for businesses prioritizing automated failover.
Download Azure Site Recovery vs. Commvault Cloud Report
Commvault Cloud features a straightforward setup with transparent costs, while Azure Site Recovery offers an efficient setup process, though it may involve higher initial expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Commvault Cloud features a straightforward setup with transparent costs, while Azure Site Recovery offers an efficient setup process, though it may involve higher initial expenses.
Azure Site Recovery Logo
Azure Site Recovery Logo
VMware Live Recovery
4.1 out of 5
Azure Site Recovery attracts tech buyers with ease of integration and automation features like load balancing. In comparison, VMware Live Recovery offers strong replication in varied environments, making it ideal for heterogeneous setups seeking robust disaster recovery.
Download Azure Site Recovery vs. VMware Live Recovery Report
Azure Site Recovery typically incurs lower setup costs, making it a more cost-effective option compared to VMware Live Recovery, which generally involves higher initial expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Azure Site Recovery typically incurs lower setup costs, making it a more cost-effective option compared to VMware Live Recovery, which generally involves higher initial expenses.
Azure Site Recovery Logo
Azure Site Recovery Logo
Nutanix Disaster Recovery as a Service
4.5 out of 5
Azure Site Recovery offers automated data recovery and simplified protection for businesses needing ease and automation. In comparison, Nutanix Disaster Recovery provides seamless multi-cloud integration and advanced orchestration, attracting companies with complex infrastructures requiring robust features. Nutanix is costlier, while Azure ensures a lower initial setup.
Download Azure Site Recovery vs. Nutanix Disaster Recovery as a Service Report
Azure Site Recovery has competitive setup costs, whereas Nutanix Disaster Recovery as a Service offers scalable solutions with varying pricing options.
View comparison
Pricing
Azure Site Recovery has competitive setup costs, whereas Nutanix Disaster Recovery as a Service offers scalable solutions with varying pricing options.
Azure Site Recovery Logo
Druva Phoenix
4.3 out of 5
Azure Site Recovery Logo
Druva Phoenix
4.3 out of 5
Druva Phoenix provides simplicity and strong customer support, appealing to businesses seeking cost-effective backup solutions with minimal setup complexities. In comparison, Azure Site Recovery offers scalability and integration with Azure services, addressing complex disaster recovery needs despite its potentially higher initial costs.
Download Azure Site Recovery vs. Druva Phoenix Report
Druva Phoenix offers straightforward setup costs with a transparent pricing model, while Azure Site Recovery involves a more complex pricing structure with potential additional costs.
View comparison
Pricing
Druva Phoenix offers straightforward setup costs with a transparent pricing model, while Azure Site Recovery involves a more complex pricing structure with potential additional costs.
Azure Site Recovery Logo
Azure Site Recovery Logo
IBM Disaster Recovery Services
4.3 out of 5
IBM Disaster Recovery Services offers extensive customization for complex environments, while Azure Site Recovery excels with seamless Azure integration. In comparison, Azure's pricing is attractive for existing Azure users. Meanwhile, IBM provides strong ROI for tailored recovery needs.
Download Azure Site Recovery vs. IBM Disaster Recovery Services Report
IBM Disaster Recovery Services involves complex setup costs, whereas Azure Site Recovery offers a more straightforward initial cost structure, highlighting a key difference in setup complexity and cost between the two services.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Disaster Recovery Services involves complex setup costs, whereas Azure Site Recovery offers a more straightforward initial cost structure, highlighting a key difference in setup complexity and cost between the two services.

Related categories

Disaster Recovery as a Service
Backup and Recovery
eDiscovery