We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and NAKIVO Backup & Replication 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."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."
"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 documentation is good, and it can be integrated with other products."
"What I like best about Azure Site Recovery is that it's easier to use because my organization already has Azure as an Active Directory solution."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"The most valuable feature is the visibility of what is happening with our business as well as the good reporting and dashboards."
"Azure Site Recovery is an easy-to-use and fairly stable solution for disaster recovery."
"We really appreciate the simplicity of the solution."
"Nakivo's backup and replication product has allowed us to implement a disaster recovery solution with a target repository in the cloud."
"The implementation of Nakivo made it possible to implement the information security policies currently in force in the company and to meet the statutory requirements in the field of IT security."
"This solution was surprisingly easy to configure."
"The ability to use a variety of cloud providers rather than being tied into one is a huge bonus."
"The user interface in general is very good. I"
"Cloud integration is valuable because the ability to not only backup locally, but to the cloud, has been a great addition to the already fantastic product."
"This product has helped to centralize backups and made it easy to recover data."
"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."
"One area for improvement with Azure is helping customers predict usage more accurately."
"I would like to see more security features."
"Site Recovery's scalability could be improved."
"The primary area for improvement in Azure Site Recovery is its pricing."
"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The pricing predictability and clarity around the final cost of the plan of this solution could be improved."
"When you schedule some jobs, you should be able to see a list of the jobs contained within each. You have to open up the editor to see what is inside. You must click through and edit stuff. Each time, it asks you to save or discard changes. It's very annoying. You only see the name of the scheduled job, and you need to edit it to see what's it's inside."
"The only thing I could say is maybe some more options for job scheduling are needed."
"One complaint I have is the dashboard flashing as it reloads/refreshes itself. The program was not always like that and it happened after an update at some point."
"At the moment I am pleased with what Nakivo does but I would like more reporting functions and if possible, integration with my RMM system."
"An additional feature that would be appreciated is disaster recovery automation."
"In terms of what could be improved for the next release, I would probably answer better documentation and licensing models."
"There is a familiar error that pops up and that is a VM error as much as it is a Nakivo error. It says that the job couldn't calm the VM and restores might be impacted. That error is, to say the least, a bit scary. I have seen this type of error on other backup systems also."
"Updating VM Tools on a replicated VM could be better."
Azure Site Recovery is ranked 1st in Disaster Recovery as a Service with 18 reviews while NAKIVO Backup & Replication is ranked 5th in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software with 84 reviews. Azure Site Recovery is rated 8.2, while NAKIVO Backup & Replication is rated 9.4. 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 NAKIVO Backup & Replication writes "Good deduplication, easy to configure, and offers a free version". Azure Site Recovery is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, VMware SRM, Zerto and AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery, whereas NAKIVO Backup & Replication is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Hornetsecurity Altaro VM Backup, Acronis Cyber Protect, Rubrik and Zerto. See our Azure Site Recovery vs. NAKIVO Backup & Replication 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.
