We performed a comparison between AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and NAKIVO Backup & Replication based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have never had any issues with scalability."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."
"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."
"The most valuable aspect of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is its instant block replication feature. This allows us to perform live block verification and eliminates the need to concern ourselves with recovery point objectives. This capability is particularly advantageous for critical workloads."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution."
"It provides our disaster recovery solution. It works fine in our tests."
"The setup is pretty straightforward."
"For regular backup and restore solutions, this product is fine."
"It is easy to manage all of the individual backup jobs, check the status every day, and it can even send an email to keep us informed."
"Creating a backup task in NAKIVO is fast and easy."
"It can be quickly configured via web pages."
"You can have it setup and running within a few minutes."
"Nakivo's reporting features have helped a lot. They give my boss high visibility into what's going on, which is crucial because we had a data breach in the past where we lost about 12 years of data. That's why we bought several appliances, and we replicate the same backup twice a day to three different depositories."
"The ability to create a replica of all virtual machines is a great feature."
"Nakivo is an easy-to-use, robust and cost-effective backup solution. I highly recommend it."
"Nakivo Backup and Replication's web-based management interface enables intuitive, rapid, and seamless configuration and management of all backup and recovery functionality across the enterprise."
"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening. If there is an issue, I would like to know what the problem is. Right now, we have to depend on the support of the vendor to check and let us know, because we don't have access to a lot of logging information."
"Sometimes a server will get a bit behind. "
"I have not seen any areas that need improvement at this time."
"The solution's network setup and a lot of the control tower setup could be improved."
"The UI could be a little sleeker."
"I would like to see better support for creating and working with archives."
"The user interface, customer support, and the recovery time for the current customer query could use improvement."
"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."
"The upgrade process is a bit dated and could use some changes."
"One of the things I liked least about this software is when an update was pushed to one of the servers we had, somehow we didn't receive the update and needed some quick troubleshooting."
"When you schedule some jobs, you should be able to see a list of the jobs contained within each. You have to open up the editor to see what is inside. You must click through and edit stuff. Each time, it asks you to save or discard changes. It's very annoying. You only see the name of the scheduled job, and you need to edit it to see what's it's inside."
"In the future, the solution should provide a more granular backup."
"I would love to see compatibility with KVM Backup."
"Automatic updates do not work, and every update has to be done manually."
"In the loading of a backup, choosing what to restore seems to be a lengthy process, but it has always worked in my restore tests."
"It would be a good thing to have some use case and architecture examples online to understand integration in complex infrastructure."
More AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is ranked 33rd in Backup and Recovery with 11 reviews while NAKIVO Backup & Replication is ranked 6th in Backup and Recovery with 84 reviews. AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is rated 7.4, while NAKIVO Backup & Replication is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery writes "Free, easy to use, and offers good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NAKIVO Backup & Replication writes "Good deduplication, easy to configure, and offers a free version". AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is most compared with Azure Site Recovery, AWS Backup, Oracle Data Guard, VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery and Zerto, whereas NAKIVO Backup & Replication is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Hornetsecurity Altaro VM Backup, Acronis Cyber Protect, Rubrik and Zerto. See our AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. NAKIVO Backup & Replication report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors and best Disaster Recovery (DR) Software vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery 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.
