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

Azure Backup vs Carbonite Server comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 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

Azure Backup
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Carbonite Server
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
57th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Backup (46th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of Azure Backup is 1.5%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Carbonite Server is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Azure Backup1.5%
Carbonite Server0.9%
Other97.6%
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

Sanjay Sahu - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager at Capgemini
Has supported secure data storage with incremental backups and centralized monitoring
Azure Backup supports all the features that we need, so additional features are not an immediate need for me. The documentation for Azure Backup seems okay for me; it is good overall, but it should be more descriptive for each item. It should elaborate more on how backup and restore are fulfilled in different scenarios. One of the reviews indicates that Azure Backup needs improvements for specific backup options beyond just full VM snapshots. I believe it should be improved actually. Regarding specific backup options, I say there should be improvements compared to how they provided them in older days.
CP
Backup, storage and disaster recovery technical specialist at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
A reliable backup product which needs little management
For most technical users the setup and initial deployment are fairly straightforward and once deployed it 99% of the time looks after itself. Installation of the agents is similar to most other products in that it has an install wizard to guide you, the accompanying documentation is also very useful to assist wherever you are in the agent install and policy setup process. Normally our customers' IT team does the deployment of agents, however, this isn't a daunting task unless you are dealing with multiple servers to protect the product. On a server-by-server basis, the deployment doesn't take long. From the MSP side of things, the infrastructure sitting behind the scenes doesn't take too much to install, configure and maintain.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"You can select the tiering for your backup and manage your cost."
"The setup of Azure Backup is very easy."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable is that it is easy to create a backup by using Azure Backup. It also has a good user interface and nice features for sending notifications when any backup fails or there is a change in the status of virtual machines."
"The deployment process is quite easy in Azure."
"All of the core features are valuable to us."
"When it comes to Azure Backup, the advantage is that it's native and it's very easy to configure. We don't require a separate tool or manage something on a separate server. At the backend, it's managed by Microsoft itself, and we don't need to manage it."
"Setting up Azure Backup is straightforward and the total deployment time was about a month."
"I like that it's a simple system."
"Technical support handled all our issues quickly and effectively."
"It seems reliable and easy to use."
"The Granular Restore of SQL feature has been a lifesaver more times than I can count. One of the main reasons for looking at Carbonite was their support for platforms like AIX and AS/400 Series."
"The solution is very stable."
"Easy verification of things is the most valuable feature."
"The solution is a free engine to help work with the container."
"The efficiency and convenience are excellent."
"I find the BMR/image and the recovery pieces are valuable."
 

Cons

"To make it a ten, it should have the ability to extend the retention and to perform a copy of the data outside of the subscription - with no additional costs."
"The monitoring and tagging features could be improved."
"The product must improve on a database level."
"Azure Backup could improve by offering better integration for Oracle databases and enhancing features like granular restore and backup compliance capabilities."
"In Avamar, the file-based restores are very quick and fast, whereas, in Azure Backup, VM restore is super easy, but if I have to do a file or a folder restore, I have to mount the entire VM image. I have to wait for some time for it to be mounted, and then I have to go inside and then check the file and copy it somewhere. It's a bit of a manual process, whereas in Avamar, you can directly select a file and folder, and it'll recover with whatever permissions you want."
"There is a limitation of 99 files restores per day which means that we can't complete a huge file restore. We would like Azure to increase the number of the possible file restorations."
"The product could improve its performance."
"The time required to restore files should be a little faster."
"In the next release I would like to see an improvement in the auto failover option."
"The only thing that I would like to see improved is related to marketing. Currently, it is very difficult to find the right paper and stuff for me. Their marketing department should provide better information because currently, it is very difficult to find information on the internet. It was bought over by OpenText, and you won't be able to find a lot of information about this solution on their site. They should also provide training facilities for commercial purposes. Some of my colleagues recently went for pilot training, and they were technical. If I want to get trained, the training has to be more commercial. Currently, there is no such training for users like me."
"The Hyper-V backup has room for improvement."
"The support for object storage isn't quite there yet. Its public cloud support can be improved. I would love to see the public cloud support for object storage, and it would be great, but what I always hear from the folks at Carbonite is that in a lot of cases, it directly competes with their cloud offering. So, I don't know when or where that will go or if that will go anywhere, but we are hopeful to see something. The dashboard is a little outdated. If they gave it a facelift and put some better design around their dashboard, that would be tremendous. I generally care less about the visual aesthetics of an application as long as it does what it needed to do, which is true in the case of this solution. We also have the Microsoft 365 platform. Because they're two separate platforms, I have to log in to my Microsoft platform to manage it, and I have to log into my Carbonite server backup platform to manage it. Having these two coexist together in one management console is really what we're looking for, but we went for it knowing this. We also knew that there would be some integration coming down the road. So, we're again hoping to see some of that coming in 2021."
"They do not yet have USB recovery but they are adding it in coming releases."
"It could be a little bit easier or faster to be able to access data files without having to download anything."
"The stability has room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is an expensive solution in the Bangladesh marketplace."
"The pricing of this solution is good, and it is one of the easiest things that you can sell Azure with."
"We have enterprise-level pricing. I rate the pricing a five out of ten."
"The price should be cheaper, but it's affordable if you use the yearly subscription."
"Price-wise, it's similar to AWS."
"We do not have any additional costs for Azure Backup."
"Customers prefer Azure Backup because it has a pay-as-you-go model, and they won't have to pay an upfront amount at the initial level."
"The price is somewhat high and could be lower."
"The pricing is between $120 and $150 per year."
"We pay 9,000 dollars per year for our license."
"The solution is open source."
"Its price is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
882,606 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise23
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

How does Azure Backup differ from Veeam Backup & Replication?
Veeam has a version for Azure but there are organizations, like ours, that are considering moving to an Azure environment and wonder if Azure Backup is better than Veeam Backup and Replication (Vee...
What do you like most about Azure Backup?
Azure Backup is easy to configure and restore.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Backup?
The pricing of Azure Backup is fine; it is a low-cost solution.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Carbonite Recover Backup
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Russell Reynolds Associates, Somerset County Council, Kardem, PCL Construction
INLINE Commercial Construction, Hamilton County
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Backup vs. Carbonite Server and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,606 professionals have used our research since 2012.