We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"It is a very stable product and very scalable."
"Azure Site Recovery's automated file synchronization was a game-changer in managing legacy systems."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of what is happening with our business as well as the good reporting and dashboards."
"The solution is secure, reliable, and scalable."
"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."
"The most useful thing is that it provides a snapshot of your environment in about 15 minutes. It is stable, and it always works. It is also scalable and easy to set up."
"Azure Site Recovery helps to save costs."
"It is a point-in-time restore, which is quite handy."
"The solution is quite stable. We haven't experienced any kind of bug or glitch. We haven't experienced crashes."
"The workload can be moved directly if the disaster site is the main site."
"RecoverPoint replicates workloads fast."
"The most valuable feature is that it is journal-based and you don't have to replicate a lot of data."
"Point-in-time recovery and ease of deployment are valuable."
"The most valuable features are the data center recovery administration and the time of recovery."
"Continuous replication with lower RTO and RPO is the most innovative feature. Its tight integration with VMware for VMware VMs is also valuable."
"I would like to see more security features."
"In the newest version of Azure Site Recovery, the configuration was a little more complex, so this is an area for improvement."
"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."
"It is for site-to-site replication. When something goes wrong on your site, you only get 15 minutes before it also goes wrong on your replicated site. There should be some way to be able to say that we want to restore it, but we want to restore it to the version from yesterday. It should support versioning. I would also like to see real-time scanning for advanced threat protection, more straightforward billing, and quicker turnaround on the tech support."
"It would be good if we could replicate the solution to multiple locations simultaneously because we are currently allowed to replicate to just a single location."
"The tool should improve synchronization."
"The support team took a lot of time to respond and was not very professional."
"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"In the next release of this software, I would like to see options that help to decrease the bandwidth required, such as compressing the data."
"I would like to have the HTML 5 interface working because it is currently not functioning with the VMware environment."
"I would like to see integration with EMC NetWorker in the next release."
"The solution is not easy to use. It's actually quite hard. If it could be simplified it might be better for the end user."
"It can have better integration. It would be good if, in addition to VMware VM, it can also support other hypervisors. I also want to see support for Oracle databases. As of now, it supports only SQL and Exchange. It would be good to also support other databases."
"The solution could improve by being more easier to use. However, once you have used it for a while it becomes easier. Additionally, there could be better support and compatibility with management by having a command-line interface. This would be beneficial for the customers."
"It would be good to have a critical application on the customer side."
"The configuration process seems a bit challenging, and the installation takes a bit longer than expected."
More Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Site Recovery is ranked 1st in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 18 reviews while Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is ranked 10th in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software with 10 reviews. Azure Site Recovery is rated 8.2, while Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Azure Site Recovery writes "Useful for restoration purposes that ensures that the users get to save a lot of time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines writes "It replicates workloads fast, but it wastes resources". Azure Site Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, VMware SRM, Zerto, AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and Datto Cloud Continuity, whereas Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines is most compared with VMware SRM, Zerto, Veeam Backup & Replication, Nutanix Disaster Recovery as a Service and HPE Disaster Recovery Services. See our Azure Site Recovery vs. Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines report.
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.