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

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Barracuda Email Gateway Defense (Barracuda Essentials) 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 Elastic Disaster Recovery
Ranking in Cloud Backup
19th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (30th), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (16th)
Barracuda Email Gateway Def...
Ranking in Cloud Backup
39th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Cloud Backup category, the mindshare of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is 1.4%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Barracuda Email Gateway Defense (Barracuda Essentials) is 0.2%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Backup
 

Featured Reviews

Vijay Londhe - PeerSpot reviewer
Managed services with seamless integration and good reliability
Since I have to view everything on the console, the previous application solutions like IBM and Sanavi showed the RPO and RTO status directly. In AWS Disaster Recovery Service, these details are not available, making it difficult to check my replication status. I have to calculate whether my data is replicated to the Adarabad region or not. These features, if available in AWS, would be beneficial.
Rajesh  Makwana - PeerSpot reviewer
Scalable platform with good technical support services
The product's implementation process was good. During the trial license period of 14 days, customers could transition between products, such as from Barracuda to Proofpoint or vice versa, without experiencing significant delays. A few domains are sometimes denied access due to site parameters. Properly configuring these parameters and pre-implementing the necessary licenses helps avoid problems on the customer's side.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is a robust and reliable solution for disaster recovery needs."
"The setup is pretty straightforward."
"The solution is dependent on the network bandwidth. For example, if they have a bandwidth of 10Mbps the solution will run a little heavier. If the bandwidth is good the solution runs well."
"What I like about ECR AWS is that it is a fully managed service, so I don't need to manage the underlying infrastructure or worry about scalability in AWS concerning building, maintenance, security, and high availability."
"​The initial setup is really straightforward."
"For regular backup and restore solutions, this product is fine."
"We have never had any issues with scalability."
"Since it is a managed service, I reduce my time to manage infrastructure and applications."
"If a customer faces an email security issue, we'll do some initial troubleshooting. If the issue isn't resolved, we work with the Barracuda team for further assistance."
"I find Barracuda Essentials' dashboard incredibly valuable as it provides everything I need at a glance."
"It makes it easier for customers to access emails during security incidents."
"The most valuable functionality is their robust blocking feature, along with fundamental rules for our environment."
 

Cons

"The only thing I would like to see is, they don't have a formal ticketing system. There is no way I can go back and see what questions we had six months back, what issues we had, and how they were resolved."
"Since I have to view everything on the console, the previous application solutions like IBM and Sanavi showed the RPO and RTO status directly. In AWS Disaster Recovery Service, these details are not available, making it difficult to check my replication status."
"I would like to see better support for creating and working with archives."
"The cost of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is seen as expensive."
"The product could be improved by incorporating more AI-driven automation for deployment and additional security features. These enhancements would make the solution even more user-friendly and secure."
"Since I have to view everything on the console, the previous application solutions like IBM and Sanavi showed the RPO and RTO status directly. In AWS Disaster Recovery Service, these details are not available, making it difficult to check my replication status."
"The failback could be improved. It should be more intuitive."
"In its current state, ECL integrates with CloudWatch for basic logging and monitoring, yet improvements could include more detailed logs for specific actions, like when I perform actions such as push or pull."
"Enhancements are required on the data transmission front."
"Sometimes there are minor issues that can be frustrating, but not consistently bad."
"There Is room for improvement in the quarantine and user interface."
"They could implement scheduled reporting in the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Where the price adds up, there are CloudEndure licenses, then there is the AWS environment, and finally, there is the AWS storage, so cumulatively, it adds up."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is charging clients $20 to do the DR backups. It is an expensive solution."
"The pricing is better now that they had come out with the Tier 2 which replicates a little less often. In comparison to what I would have been spending with any other type of solution, the pricing is fair."
"We were happy with the pricing that they gave us."
"I rate the price of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery a six out of ten."
"They license us on a per machine basis. We have a set number of machines, which we have licensed.​"
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"It has saved us money from having to buy hardware for disaster recovery."
"The product's price is higher than other vendors."
"It is cheaper compared to other products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Backup solutions are best for your needs.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
12%
Healthcare Company
10%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
The setup is actually managed by our partner. I have taken a rate of per user. Licensing is completely managed by the partner. I am paying per user and per GB storage cost, while the infrastructure...
What needs improvement with CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
In its current state, ECL integrates with CloudWatch for basic logging and monitoring, yet improvements could include more detailed logs for specific actions, like when I perform actions such as pu...
What do you like most about Barracuda Email Gateway Defense (Barracuda Essentials)?
If a customer faces an email security issue, we'll do some initial troubleshooting. If the issue isn't resolved, we work with the Barracuda team for further assistance.
What needs improvement with Barracuda Email Gateway Defense (Barracuda Essentials)?
The features and product itself are good. Sometimes there are minor issues that can be frustrating, but not consistently bad.
 

Also Known As

CloudEndure Disaster Recovery
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agio, Cloud Nation, Limelight Networks
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. Barracuda Email Gateway Defense (Barracuda Essentials) and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.