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

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.3
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery enhanced efficiency and cost-effectiveness by reducing costs, improving recovery, and streamlining system integration.
Sentiment score
7.2
Azure Site Recovery is cost-effective, time-saving, and reliable, optimizing virtual machine processes and offering an alternative to secondary data centers.
However, with AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Service being a native service, integration is seamless, highlighting the return on investment.
Assistant Programmer at Mahadis
The recovery process requires fewer people and much less time, which has saved my organization engineering effort and operational time.
Data Engineer at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
We no longer have to schedule employees on weekends since the system automatically triggers alerts, allowing engineers to respond as needed.
Senior Java Developer at J.P. Morgan
Azure Site Recovery, while being pricier than some providers, has a sufficient service level to justify costs.
Client Relationship Manager at Infomag
Azure Site Recovery is time-saving, and its features allow us to automate processes and save resources.
Senior Infrastructure Engineer at MIC Global
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery's responsive support is rated highly, with quick resolution and effective technical help for enterprise customers.
Sentiment score
6.4
Microsoft's Azure Site Recovery support is knowledgeable but inconsistent, with mixed reviews on response times and communication efficiency.
In case of any issue, they are ready to provide support within the defined SLA timeline.
Assistant Programmer at Mahadis
Helping us in troubleshooting each and every step if we face any issues.
Data Engineer at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Higher tiers offer faster response time and more direct technical help.
Software Engineer at INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING
During a global outage that affected our operations, there was no apology or in-depth follow-up from Microsoft.
Chief Technology Officer at a insurance company with 51-200 employees
Microsoft support could be improved as it rates only a five out of ten, with slow response times and a preference for email over phone communication even in severity B cases.
IT Manager at NTT DATA
We primarily rely on our Cloud Support Partner for support.
Senior Infrastructure Engineer at MIC Global
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.0
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is scalable, supporting seamless growth and replication across diverse environments with automatic recovery features.
Sentiment score
7.7
Azure Site Recovery is scalable, excelling in cloud migration and disaster recovery for businesses, despite regional scalability variations.
We can expand it to multiple data centers or different areas such as EMEA and APAC.
Senior Java Developer at J.P. Morgan
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is scalable because it can protect and replicate multiple servers and workloads, and it runs on AWS infrastructure.
Software Engineer at INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING
The scalability is quite good and we were able to scale this service to many of the services that our company uses.
Senior Software Engineer at Thomson Reuters
I would rate the scalability of Azure Site Recovery as a nine out of ten.
Chief Technology Officer at a insurance company with 51-200 employees
Scalability is provided because they are offering 99.95% availability.
IT Manager at NTT DATA
Azure Site Recovery is a very scalable product and service mechanism.
Client Relationship Manager at Infomag
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery offers reliable performance, minor lags seldom occur, though costs from data replication can be a concern.
Sentiment score
7.7
Azure Site Recovery is highly rated for stability and scalability, frequently scoring between seven and ten by users.
It is very good and very reliable.
DevOps Engineer at DivVerse Labs
AWS is not difficult, but the cost associated with replicating data to another region can be significant.
Assistant Programmer at Mahadis
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is stable.
Senior Java Developer at J.P. Morgan
The system did go down a couple of times, which impacted our operations.
Chief Technology Officer at a insurance company with 51-200 employees
I would rate the stability of Azure Site Recovery at eight to nine out of ten.
Senior Infrastructure Engineer at MIC Global
 

Room For Improvement

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery users want improved monitoring, documentation, intuitive interface, automation, reporting, cost insights, support, and usability.
Azure Site Recovery needs better integration, deployment, stability, security, and support, with improved logging, pricing, and platform compatibility.
Our RPO improved from approximately three to four hours to less than one minute.
Software Engineer at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
This would detail user activity directly in the ACL console for easier debugging and auditing.
DevOps Engineer at DivVerse Labs
It would be beneficial to get some insights when a disaster happens, including identification and probable solutions to ensure effective recovery.
Senior Java Developer at J.P. Morgan
If their agent version is mismatched and the health status is critical, you will not be able to perform your Azure Site Recovery.
IT Manager at NTT DATA
There is room for improvement in the release of patches, such as ensuring they are properly managed to avoid outages.
Client Relationship Manager at Infomag
Currently, Azure Site Recovery does not support shared disk options.
Senior Infrastructure Engineer at MIC Global
 

Setup Cost

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery offers a cost-effective pay-as-you-go model, despite varying opinions on fairness and contract flexibility.
Azure Site Recovery offers cost-effective DR solutions despite complex billing, with average monthly site-to-site replication costs at $225.
In my case, since the cloud is basically a pay-as-you-go model, we only pay for the replication storage, data transfer, and small staging instances.
Data Engineer at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Continuous replication minimizes data loss and the cost-efficient staging environment helps reduce infrastructure expenses compared to maintaining a full secondary disaster recovery site.
Software Engineer at INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING
There is definitely a scope of improvement, and for year-end licensing, they should definitely improve the cost.
Senior Software Engineer at Thomson Reuters
It was not the expensive part of our costs.
Chief Technology Officer at a insurance company with 51-200 employees
A major advantage is that you do not want to pay any more for huge costs to build a DR site.
IT Manager at NTT DATA
The pricing of Azure Site Recovery is around a four out of ten, being somewhat cost-effective.
Client Relationship Manager at Infomag
 

Valuable Features

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery ensures efficient, secure, and cost-effective disaster recovery with seamless AWS integration and automated processes.
Azure Site Recovery is praised for seamless failover, ease of use, compatibility, but may be costly for smaller clients.
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery supports a wide range of source environments, including VMware, Hyper-V, physical servers, and other cloud providers, making it versatile for different IT infrastructures.
Senior Software Engineer at Thomson Reuters
The low RPO at a seconds-level replication and a fast recovery with a low RTO provide the most cost-effective way, paying mostly for storage until failover.
Software Engineer at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
Overall, the best combination of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is its near real-time replication and quick recovery testing, and this makes the service very useful in real-world scenarios.
Data Engineer at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Its time-saving aspects allow us to write PowerShell scripts to automate failover processes.
Senior Infrastructure Engineer at MIC Global
Azure provides a 99.99% SLA for their uptime, ensuring that even during outages due to patch releases, there is no data loss, merely hindered accessibility.
Client Relationship Manager at Infomag
The most valuable features of Azure Site Recovery are its ease of use and speed of recovery.
Chief Technology Officer at a insurance company with 51-200 employees
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (20th), Cloud Backup (12th), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (11th)
Azure Site Recovery
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Disaster Recovery as a Service (3rd)
 

Featured Reviews

KS
Data Engineer at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Continuous replication has protected critical servers and supports seamless disaster recovery drills
Some features that I personally feel can be improved are more simplified monitoring and reporting. As I previously mentioned, the console shows the replication status. If it had more detailed dashboards or built-in reports for DR readiness, it would make it easier for the teams to track everything in one place. Another improvement would be cost visibility and optimization guidance in optimizing the cost and also giving us visibility of it. Because the staging resources and replication storage are running continuously, it would be very helpful for organizations and users if AWS provided clearer cost insights, recommendations, and remediations to optimize the DR environment. It would also be useful if AWS added more automation options for application-level recovery, such as easier ways to handle IP changes, domain name system (DNS) updates, or application dependencies during failover. Additionally, we can simplify the setup and configuration process. For someone new to the service, understanding the staging settings, launch templates, and networking configurations can take some time. Setup simplicity and more detailed monitoring and alerting features would be beneficial. If we could add that, we can easily track the replication health, lag, and potential issues. Instead of relying on other additional tools for monitoring and alerting features, we can rely on AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery itself.
AP
IT Manager at NTT DATA
Long-term user praises cost savings and reliability of disaster recovery solutions
There is only one thing to note: the agent has to be up-to-date when SCCM or any third-party tools are doing patching activities. If their agent version is mismatched and the health status is critical, you will not be able to perform your Azure Site Recovery. Recently, I worked with a mass issue related to Recovery Services Vault, and the VM support engineers are taking a lot of time to extend support to the customer. When you raise a call, they wait too long, and even if you request an engineer to set up a call for severity B cases, they are not ready to communicate over the phone, preferring email instead.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions are best for your needs.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Insurance Company
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise11
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise14
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
The pricing has been fine, and regarding the setup cost as well, it is quite fine. There is definitely a scope of improvement, and for year-end licensing, they should definitely improve the cost.
What needs improvement with CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
After implementing AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery, we significantly improved our disaster recovery metrics. Our RPO improved from approximately three to four hours to less than one minute. While the...
What is your primary use case for CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
Our main use case for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery was to ensure that if our primary on-premises data center failed, we could quickly launch EC2 instances in AWS to resume production. The main use...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Site Recovery?
A major advantage is that you do not want to pay any more for huge costs to build a DR site. It is very flexible and will save your cost.
What needs improvement with Azure Site Recovery?
The flexibility of Azure Site Recovery regarding integration with different IT environments is limited; it is purely an Azure platform service for business continuity, not meant for integration wit...
What is your primary use case for Azure Site Recovery?
My main use case for Azure Site Recovery is that we are doing cross-region disaster recovery and processing.
 

Also Known As

CloudEndure Disaster Recovery
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agio, Cloud Nation, Limelight Networks
Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. Azure Site Recovery and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.