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

Axcient x360Recover 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Axcient x360Recover
Ranking in Disaster Recovery as a Service
12th
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Azure Site Recovery
Ranking in Disaster Recovery as a Service
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Disaster Recovery as a Service category, the mindshare of Axcient x360Recover is 2.4%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Azure Site Recovery is 12.7%, down from 22.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Disaster Recovery as a Service Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Azure Site Recovery12.7%
Axcient x360Recover2.4%
Other84.9%
Disaster Recovery as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1267455 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Field Strategy at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
State-of-the-art disaster recovery
One of the areas that I would absolutely say that they should improve, is the recovery from the backup when you're running in a failover mode. In other words, if I have to bring the server online on the appliance (so I'm running on the backup image), there should be a way for me to replicate back to or restore back to the hardware or the original source, and then, in the end, you would do a Delta sync and switch over. As of today, I have to shut everything down and the entire resource has to be offline while I'm doing the recovery. So having the ability to kind of recover while running would be a great feature to have. Also, when you failover to the appliance, it doesn't retain the IP information. I have to go in and update the IP information for each of the boxes that I have to fill up. If you're only doing one or two, it's not really a big deal, but if you had to failover, for example, 10-12 boxes because an entire EM infrastructure went down hardware-wise for some reason, you have to know all those IPs and go in and set them up and restart them — that can take a little bit of time. So retaining the IP information would be great.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's super stable. We really like it."
"Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"What I love about Azure Site Recovery is its simplicity for basic configurations."
"They're moving a lot of their workload to cloud and aiming for a seamlessly integrated product."
"The features I find most valuable in Azure Site Recovery include the test failover, which allows us to test our site recovery without bringing down the primary; disaster recovery provides that feature."
"Azure Site Recovery is an easy-to-use and fairly stable solution for disaster recovery."
"We use the tool for business continuity purposes."
"Provides generally good performance, from protection to production to failover to data recovery."
"The solution is very easy to use."
 

Cons

"As of today, I have to shut everything down and the entire resource has to be offline while I'm doing the recovery. So having the ability to kind of recover while running would be a great feature to have."
"I conveyed the feedback to the agent, suggesting an increase in the agent count in our VNS in the USA. I also addressed notification concerns, as some issues didn't trigger alerts during a recent call."
"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Site Recovery's scalability could be improved."
"we lack a straightforward method to automate the restart of services, which can be quite time-consuming."
"Azure Site Recovery does not support shared disk options."
"When it runs, it runs well but when it doesn't run, the solution needs to make it clearer as to why and what the troubleshooting process is. All this would be possible if the error logging was streamlined a bit."
"The system did go down a couple of times, which impacted our operations. For stability, I would rate it a seven out of ten."
"The support team took a lot of time to respond and was not very professional."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I believe that (if I'm not mistaken), there are a couple of different pricing models."
"The tool's licensing is yearly and not expensive."
"Azure Site Recovery is a very reasonably priced product."
"They have a license to pay."
"Azure Site Recovery is affordable."
"It should have more straightforward billing. The billing was what got funky. It was really cheap. We would pay based on the usage. We paid around $225 a month for site-to-site replication."
"The tool is expensive. What is expensive to me might not be expensive to you. As I mentioned, we seek ways to reduce our costs. If the price goes down, that would be great. I rate the tool's pricing a six out of ten."
"I'm not sure about the Azure Site Recovery pricing, but my organization gets monthly bills from providers."
"Azure Site Recovery is neither very expensive nor very cheap."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
881,821 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise14
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Azure Site Recovery?
Azure Site Recovery allows my company to save around 30 percent of the time on every VM that we need to back up and restore.
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...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ford Bacon & Davis, Torrance Casting, Northeast Valley Health Corporation, Bartlett Cocke General Contractors, Bruno Gerbino and Soriano, IronEdge Group, The Pennington School, NSK, Datasafe, InPursuit Solutions, Borough of West Chester
Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, Commvault, Microsoft and others in Disaster Recovery as a Service. Updated: February 2026.
881,821 professionals have used our research since 2012.