No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs QoreStor comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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 Backup and Recovery
9th
Ranking in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Backup (9th)
QoreStor
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
51st
Ranking in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Data Replication (9th), Disk Based Backup Systems (7th), Storage Software (4th), Software Defined Storage (SDS) (18th), Copy Data Management (6th), File and Object Storage (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of QoreStor is 0.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery0.9%
QoreStor0.8%
Other98.3%
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

Kavya S - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
MW
Works at a financial services firm with 11-50 employees
Backup storage has shrunk dramatically with deduplication but still needs stronger security options
The air gap feature is something I'd really like to see in QoreStor. There's no native air gap capability right now, and for security-conscious environments, that's a gap. The configuration export is also limited in QoreStor. If you want to document your setup or migrate configuration to a new instance, it requires more manual work than it should.

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 reliable and cost-effective solution for business continuity."
"Some of the most valuable features of this product include its ability to manage disaster recovery effectively."
"AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is a robust and reliable solution for disaster recovery needs."
"It's on the cheaper side and not too expensive for users."
"The ability to replicate our database and our data from one cloud to another is the most valuable feature."
"CloudEndure is easy, and block-level replication will happen."
"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."
"It provides our disaster recovery solution. It works fine in our tests.​"
"The dedupe and compression are pretty extreme. On disk, we're getting dedupe rates of up to 65 percent of data and compression of 34 percent. When you go to the cloud, it's more like 76 percent for dedupe and almost 50 percent for compression."
"Overall, it simplifies the management of backup and gives me a more secure feeling that my data is going to be available if I need to retrieve it."
"QoreStor has helped us to reduce our backup storage requirements on-premises. We've been using the same devices for quite a while, and so it lets us keep using them as opposed to having to rip out all that hardware and create a new on-prem solution. The advantage here is even if we had to retire the hardware tomorrow, the QoreStor part doesn't change. We just have to have additional hardware and put the solution back on whatever hardware we pick and it'll do the same thing."
"Since we started to resell QoreStor, we have been using it internally; it's better than other backup solutions we have used or evaluated."
"Deduplication is the most valuable feature. It saves us a lot of space. When we back up 100 terabytes of data, after dedupe, it only uses maybe five to six terabytes for the disk space in QoreStor."
"The features we use for the data deduplication are nice because we're able to back up a much larger amount of data, yet it doesn't necessarily take up that much data on the devices."
"We need revisions and safe backup so that it could be held up in court, but deduplication and compression are the main features why we have Quest QoreStor. That's where it really shines. I use ZFS and XFS at home, and Quest QoreStor is even better."
"Quest QoreStor is very stable compared to our previous solution."
 

Cons

"The UI could be a little sleeker."
"The initial setup was complex rather than straightforward. It became more complex in several ways."
"While the service is very effective, it could improve in areas such as more granular cost visibility during staging and test launches."
"Sometimes a server will get a bit behind. ​"
"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."
"There is definitely a scope of improvement, and for year-end licensing, they should definitely improve the cost."
"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."
"We believe that customer support for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery needs to be improved because although we do raise tickets, the response can take some time."
"The setup of the software is definitely not the easiest thing in the world."
"Overall, I am happy with this solution, but a way to export configuration settings would be beneficial."
"Overall, I am happy with this solution, but a way to export configuration settings would be beneficial. After everything is set up and configured, there should be a way to export the configuration. In case something happens to the QoreStor server, and we need to reinstall and configure everything, being able to import the configuration would be helpful. This feature does not currently exist."
"The importance of support is significant to me. I was working for a service provider, and all of our customers had a Quest or warning. Sometimes the support really underperforms."
"In terms of improvement, we would like to have an Air Gap feature to prevent a virus from attaching to something. So that when we don't do a backup, we want the QoreStor to stay offline. It would be a nice feature to have."
"The installation could use improvement. The initial installation was a little touchy and it's not really user-installable. You have to have a connection to support to install."
"There can be some kind of monitoring solutions to alert users to issues with the appliance or software, making it easy for customers to monitor their systems in the field."
"They could improve on support a little bit. We have not had to engage their support much, but when we do have issues, it can take longer to get things resolved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the price of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery a six out of ten."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is charging clients $20 to do the DR backups. It is an expensive solution."
"We were happy with the pricing that they gave us."
"I feel the product's pricing is a good value. Licensing is pretty straightforward."
"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."
"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."
"They license us on a per machine basis. We have a set number of machines, which we have licensed.​"
"It has saved us money from having to buy hardware for disaster recovery."
"Quest QoreStor's pricing is affordable. We evaluated Veeam, a well-known company for backup solutions, but found their pricing to be quite high. Veeam's price was almost double. For us, Quest QoreStor is very affordable."
"The pricing is good. It is competitive for a managed services provider. I like the ability to pay by the terabyte, allowing for an incremental cost that we and our customers can afford, so the solution grows with the customer."
"The cost is per terabyte, and overall, the cost was reasonable when compared to some competitors."
"Its pricing model is very attractive. You have one price, and you get everything from QoreStor."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Construction Company
10%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Construction Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
The cost rating was assessed on a scale where 10 represented the most expensive.
What needs improvement with CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
There are areas that could be improved beyond the downtime issues mentioned, and AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery could enhance several aspects of its functionality.
What else besides data replication does QoreStor offer?
Quest QoreStor can be used for multiple things besides data replication. For example, it can be trusted to make a backup of your data. You know that replication and backups are different, right? Re...
How does Quest QoreStore protect your data?
One of our favorite features of Quest QoreStore for data protection isn't the backup, actually, though we're using it actively (maybe just as much as data replication, to be honest). We absolutely ...
How does Quest QoreStore solve repetitive data replicas?
When I first found out about data replication and the many benefits it had, I couldn't help but wonder - what about the copies you don't need? Like it's unavoidable for some of the copies to get da...
 

Also Known As

CloudEndure Disaster Recovery
QoreStor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agio, Cloud Nation, Limelight Networks
American Airlines, at&t, Bank of America. Barclays, ebay, Ford
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. QoreStor and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,877 professionals have used our research since 2012.