Azure Site Recovery vs OpenText Recover comparison

Microsoft and OpenText are both solutions in the Disaster Recovery (DR) Software category. Additionally, 92% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Azure Site Recovery

Read 26 Azure Site Recovery reviews

2,388 Views
884 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

OpenText Recover

Read 1 OpenText Recover review

191 Views
147 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Azure Site Recovery

OpenText Recover

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and OpenText Recover based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Veeam Software, Commvault and others in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software.

To learn more, read our detailed Disaster Recovery (DR) Software Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 867,370 peers since 2012

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 Site Recovery

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Disaster Recovery as a Service (3rd)

OpenText Recover

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

8.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (26th)

Featured Reviews

RituparnaBhattacharya

Senior Infrastructure Engineer at MIC Global

The time-saving aspects allow us to write PowerShell scripts to automate failover processes

First of all, we initially faced a challenge as Azure Site Recovery was not supporting shared disk options on SQL clusters with VMs, which are important for a Windows cluster mode. Additionally, the setup is quite easy, only requiring the creation of a vault. Its time-saving aspects allow us to write PowerShell scripts to automate failover processes.

Read full review

Rias Majeed

CTO at Exceed NetSec LLC

Allows you to test and schedule recovery tasks for multiple sites

The main weakness of Carbonite Recover is the fallback process, which can be time-consuming. However, the failover process works well when done properly. Similar to other software programs, there was a technical issue involving duplicates and small glitches. Over time, Carbonite recovery has improved. When I started working with Cyber, we had to double-check everything, and although it was challenging, the downtime wasn't extensive—one incident in a year, for example. Restoring data with Carbonite Recover can take time, mainly because the backup process occurs in real time. The main concern is the duration needed to restore data to the primary environment, which can be lengthy. However, once the failover is complete, there are no further issues.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Azure Site Recovery is obviously a time-saving solution, and I can write PowerShell scripts to automate failover on or off processes."

"The solution is secure, reliable, and scalable."

"We use the solution across hospitality and healthcare domains. We use it for custom development. It helps us develop a seamless omnichannel for the healthcare industry."

"A major benefit is that you do not want to pay any more for huge costs to build a DR site."

"The setup is quite easy, just requiring the creation of a vault."

"It’s native to Azure and does exactly what it’s designed to do—recover one site to another without creating all the VMs on that site. This helps reduce costs on the secondary site."

"The most valuable feature is the visibility of what is happening with our business as well as the good reporting and dashboards."

"You can create automation to move workloads and redirect traffic to another region."

More Azure Site Recovery pros

"We confirm the server failure before initiating recovery. Once started, this process takes half an hour to an hour, though it can be as fast as 15 minutes. After bringing up the server, we test connectivity to ensure everything is operational."

Cons

"The solution needs to improve replication and failover processes. We are still looking for improvements in the cost baseline."

"I would like to see more security features."

"We need to be able to move the virtual servers and not build and then port them across. They need to improve the hypervisor."

"The primary area for improvement in Azure Site Recovery is its pricing."

"There is room for improvement in the release of patches, such as ensuring they are properly managed to avoid outages."

"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"The tool should improve synchronization."

"we lack a straightforward method to automate the restart of services, which can be quite time-consuming."

More Azure Site Recovery cons

"The main weakness of Carbonite Recover is the fallback process, which can be time-consuming. However, the failover process works well when done properly. Similar to other software programs, there was a technical issue involving duplicates and small glitches."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Azure Site Recovery is neither very expensive nor very cheap."

"Azure Site Recovery is a very reasonably priced product."

"The tool's licensing is yearly and not expensive."

"Azure Site Recovery is affordable."

"I'm not sure about the Azure Site Recovery pricing, but my organization gets monthly bills from providers."

"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."

"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."

"They have a license to pay."

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	14

No data available

Questions from the Community

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Carbonite Recover?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Carbonite Recover?

Carbonite Recover is an effective tool for testing and scheduling recovery tasks for multiple sites, whether they have primary servers or virtual machines. You can schedule jobs for recovery at the...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Carbonite Recover?

Carbonite Recover is a downtime reduction solution that minimizes the time employees cannot work. Carbonite Recover can accurately measure how much potential productivity or revenue is saved per ho...

See all answers

Comparisons

HPE Zerto Software vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 17% of the time

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 14% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 13% of the time

VMware Live Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 12% of the time

Rubrik vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 8% of the time

More Azure Site Recovery Competitors

Datto Cloud Continuity vs OpenText Recover

Compared 55% of the time

VMware Live Recovery vs OpenText Recover

Compared 45% of the time

More OpenText Recover Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Site Recovery

September 2025

Download Azure Site Recovery product report

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software

September 2025

Download OpenText Recover product report

Overview

Help your business to keep doing business - even during major IT outages. Azure Site Recovery offers ease of deployment, cost effectiveness, and dependability. Deploy replication, failover, and recovery processes through Site Recovery to help keep your applications running during planned and unplanned outages. Site Recovery is a native disaster recovery as a service (DRaaS), and Microsoft been recognized as a leader in DRaaS based on completeness of vision and ability to execute by Gartner in the 2018 Magic Quadrant for Disaster Recovery as a Service.

Microsoft

OpenText Recover offers businesses a robust data protection solution, ensuring continuity and data recovery across key infrastructures.

With OpenText Recover, organizations are empowered with reliable recovery measures that protect mission-critical data, featuring seamless integration across various platforms. The technology aligns with industry's best practices, delivering comprehensive safeguards that enhance resilience.

What are the key features of OpenText Recover?

Automated Backups: Streamlines data protection with scheduled backups to minimize manual intervention.
Disaster Recovery: Provides rapid restoration of essential data in emergency scenarios, reducing downtime.
Cloud Support: Integrates easily with cloud infrastructures, offering flexible storage options.
Scalability: Adapts to growing enterprise data needs, maintaining performance efficiencies.

What benefits or ROI should users consider?

Cost Efficiency: Minimizes expenses related to data loss and extended downtime.
Operational Continuity: Ensures business processes remain uninterrupted during data incidents.
Compliance Support: Helps meet data protection regulations through comprehensive security measures.
Enhanced Reliability: Delivers consistent and dependable recovery services, boosting trust in infrastructure.

OpenText Recover is widely implemented across industries like finance, healthcare, and telecommunications. It supports data integrity and swift recovery in financial systems, ensures patient data is safeguarded in healthcare, and helps telecom providers maintain uninterrupted services. The diverse applications make it a versatile tool in maintaining critical operations.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery (DR) Software

September 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Veeam Software, Commvault and others in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Disaster Recovery (DR) Software vendors.

We monitor all Disaster Recovery (DR) Software 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.