Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AWS Backup vs Quorum OnQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 2024

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

AWS Backup
Ranking in Cloud Backup
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
SaaS Backup (4th)
Quorum OnQ
Ranking in Cloud Backup
36th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (46th), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Cloud Backup category, the mindshare of AWS Backup is 3.4%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Quorum OnQ is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Backup
 

Featured Reviews

MuhammadAzhar Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Simplify compliance and management of multiple backups with centralized cloud solutions
AWS Backup could benefit from including more services. Currently, it only includes around ten services, while AWS offers over three hundred plus services. Also, it would be helpful if AWS Backup could integrate logs more thoroughly. This would allow not only new users but also experienced users to more easily check logs directly from AWS Backup.
Mohamed Iqbal - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and economical solution that provides quick disaster recovery
The most valuable feature of Quorum OnQ is quick recovery. We call it a single-click recovery. If any server goes down, crashes, or experiences downtime, we can bring up the DR (Disaster Recovery) server in just two minutes. We also have a "Single Pane of Glass," wherein we work with only a single window. You don't have to use multiple windows to perform basic tasks like failover or failback.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The customer service is top-notch, rated ten out of ten."
"It is an easy-to-use solution."
"The snapshots we take through AWS Backup are very effective."
"The most valuable feature is its ease of use."
"I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is the daily incremental site backup."
"It also saves costs and is quick."
"It's very easy to configure. Since it's a managed service, it's very straightforward to set up and use. And my customers get on with it very fast."
"The most valuable feature is spinning up a ready-to-go VM in a test or production environment that is based on a backup stored on the Quorum device."
"When it comes to recovering what you need from a backup, it's really easy. You just drill through the directory, find the file and the date that you want, and click to recover. You then pick the directory you want to save it in. Usually, it takes a minute or two and it's done. It's quick and easy."
"Quorum OnQ has a good ransomware protection feature, and customer service and support were very good."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most useful feature is the one-click recovery."
"It's easy to implement, easy to spin up, easily configurable, to drop-in appliances and network. There wasn't a lot of time needed to spin it up."
"I have used the BMR (Bare Metal Restore) in several emergencies and it has absolutely saved my bacon."
"It provides a smooth training experience and easy terminology for those in the advocacy world."
 

Cons

"Its cost could be better than a few of its competitors."
"There are multiple enhancements needed in terms of compatibility with all database services, as AWS Backup is currently limited to specific ones."
"For additional functionalities, it should be more intelligent, like more AI-capabilities."
"There could be a centralized dashboard with a reporting feature notifying us of daily backup status."
"To create a plan and for all the configuration, one has to do multiple steps, which could be organized in a much simpler way, making the user experience better."
"The solution's reporting features and restore features can be improved."
"The notifications on the backup and on the mobile app could be more useful. If they could arrange notes or notifications properly and offer services for managing it in our region, it would be helpful for us."
"If AWS could also add some hybrid cloud features to AWS Backup, that would be a significant improvement. For example, currently, AWS Backup only backs up to the S3 and Amazon Cloud, and you can only restore from the Amazon Cloud only. However, some people have hybrid environments. They have some workloads on-premises and some workloads in the cloud."
"Lacks compatibility in terms of supporting other OS."
"It feels to me like it's going to be a little bit more work than I originally anticipated when upgrading the appliance. I haven't done that yet so I can't speak from true experience, but I went through the project plan and it feels to me like there's quite a number of pieces and components and things that have to be done. Quorum is going to manage the rollout, but in starting the initial conversation there were a lot of unanswered questions"
"I would like to see iSCSI support added so that NAS storage servers could be protected. We heavily utilize NAS storage and the risk there is minimal backup options. Currently, we are backing up NAS to NAS which is costly and slow. Being able to integrate NAS server backup would be the last item on my Quorum bucket list."
"They have radio buttons that allow multiselection, which is not intuitive. Also, the URL for our environments is the same, making it confusing for management when handling different departments with different needs."
"The one thing they could do is some tweaking on the web solution that's supposed to monitor everything from one page, rather than having to bring each server up on its own webpage. It doesn't always accurately show what the system's state is at the time, and we have to restart that process now and then."
"It would be beneficial if file culling could be more granular."
"There was a situation I faced in the past when I contacted the tool's support team, and it took them a while to respond."
"I would really like it if they followed comparable products from other vendors and had an option where you could offload to tape. I know it sounds incredibly antiquated, but the benefit I see is that there would be a better air gap than you have with backing up to an online source."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The clients pay for the whole AWS bundle. It is an affordable solution."
"Price-wise, I rate the solution a six out of ten. One only has to pay for the storage cost of AWS solutions, which is the standard cost provided by AWS."
"We don't use a lot of space, only approximately 900 GB, so the price is reasonable. For standing, it's okay. We normally do a payment to SSML, and they are the ones who pay over there. It is around $100 monthly."
"The product is inexpensive."
"There is a lot of flexibility with the services and pricing. The price is reasonable when compared to other products. This is very good for us."
"The solution's price is reasonable."
"The pricing is decent."
"AWS is more expensive than some competitors like Azure."
"We have never questioned whether it is worth it because it so obviously is a great value."
"When we quote the price of Quorum to customers, they find it expensive."
"Quorum OnQ can be described as a medium-priced product...There are no ingress and egress charges in the product."
"The upfront cost of purchasing a license for the hardware is quite steep."
"I am not sure how much it costs, but I know it's expensive."
"The initial expenditure for us was a little under $40,000 for the recent renewal. For the first three years after that, other than electricity, there's no cost. After that, their support contract has to be renewed annually. We spent close to $6,000, between the two offices, for support."
"The pricing is about $1,400 a month. It's a little bit on the higher side. But it's one of those situations where time is valuable for me. So if it costs a little bit more money for me to have a solution that just works and requires less of my day-to-day management, I'm willing to pay a little bit more."
"The cost is higher than other software and services, but it is an absolute must-have."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Backup solutions are best for your needs.
859,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Real Estate/Law Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about AWS Backup?
The solution's most valuable features are its backup capability and tight integration with other AWS services.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS Backup?
AWS Backup operates on a pay-as-you-go model without requiring a license.
What needs improvement with AWS Backup?
Regarding disadvantages of AWS Backup, it can be expensive and not particularly user-friendly. To perform backups, we need to follow specific steps and queries. When refreshing, if we want to do da...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Quorum OnQ?
It's a little expensive. That said, the cost aligns with other advocacy tools we have evaluated.
What needs improvement with Quorum OnQ?
They have radio buttons that allow multiselection, which is not intuitive. Also, the URL for our environments is the same, making it confusing for management when handling different departments wit...
 

Also Known As

No data available
OnQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TransferWise
LCL Bulk Transport
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Backup vs. Quorum OnQ and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,533 professionals have used our research since 2012.