We performed a comparison between AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery and Zerto based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Backup and Recovery solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The setup is pretty straightforward."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is a fairly stable solution."
"It provides our disaster recovery solution. It works fine in our tests."
"We went from an organization with minimal to no disaster recovery. I was able to spin up the disaster recovery environment with AWS rather quickly and meet business requirements."
"The solution is dependent on the network bandwidth. For example, if they have a bandwidth of 10Mbps the solution will run a little heavier. If the bandwidth is good the solution runs well."
"The initial setup is really straightforward."
"Technical support has been very good. They usually respond quickly to our requests."
"The testing features are the most valuable features of this solution. We use the failover test feature not just for testing failovers and disaster recovery, we've also had clients use it for development purposes as well as patching purposes to test patches. We can failover the VM and then we can make any changes we want without affecting production. It's a nice sandbox for that usage."
"The near-synchronous replication is one of the primary reasons we're using Zerto because we have recovery intervals of sub-five seconds. On a scale of 10, where 10 is "very important", this feature is a 10."
"The stability is great; there's very little downtime. I don't have to worry that there will be a surprise update to one of the ZVRAs or the host that I have to contend with. We're given plenty of notice to plan ahead for an update. As far as losing service and downtime, we haven't had that happen."
"The migration and ease of use are valuable. It is easy to set up and easy to flip. We just need to click on Move."
"It is incredibly granular and I really appreciate that."
"Zerto enables us to do sandboxing failovers. You can run tests on a production environment in a sandbox and spin up a copy of your actual production environment in a few hours. When you're done with it, you can click a couple of buttons, and it's all blown away. You don't need to worry about reverting changes or interfering with your on-prem production environments."
"When we use our VMware environment, sometimes the HP hardware is not compatible, and we start to lose data. I like that we can restore our whole application and public-facing system through Zerto."
"It does what it's purported to do, which is to provide continuous data protection. We have a five-second RPO. It's definitely doing its job."
"The solution's network setup and a lot of the control tower setup could be improved."
"The only thing I would like to see is, they don't have a formal ticketing system. There is no way I can go back and see what questions we had six months back, what issues we had, and how they were resolved."
"The user interface, customer support, and the recovery time for the current customer query could use improvement."
"I would like to see better support for creating and working with archives."
"The UI could be a little sleeker."
"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."
"Sometimes a server will get a bit behind. "
"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening. If there is an issue, I would like to know what the problem is. Right now, we have to depend on the support of the vendor to check and let us know, because we don't have access to a lot of logging information."
"Zerto's solution could benefit from additional security features, such as malware scanning tools at the recovery site."
"There are still some pieces in testing that aren't automated. There are still some built-in scripts or workflows I wish Zerto would do out-of-the-box, versus having to PowerShell or have a vendor create it, or create it myself."
"Zerto's price has room for improvement."
"They could improve their online documentation."
"We'd like to be able to migrate data without its operating system or any other functionality and without having to go through a virtual machine or server."
"Zerto can improve the dashboard by making it even more simple. Right now, there's a lot on the dashboard, and it can be overwhelming. If you're an experienced user, then you'll find it easy to use, but if you're a beginner, it will take you some time."
"When we do failover and failback, it doesn't maintain some of the settings that it should and I don't really understand why that happens."
"Some of the ability to automate selections and automate VPG creations could be better."
More AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is ranked 33rd in Backup and Recovery with 11 reviews while Zerto is ranked 2nd in Backup and Recovery with 233 reviews. AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is rated 7.4, while Zerto is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery writes "Free, easy to use, and offers good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zerto writes "Gives us business continuity capabilities during hurricane season and in case of ransomware". AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is most compared with Azure Site Recovery, AWS Backup, Oracle Data Guard, VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery and Veeam Backup & Replication, whereas Zerto is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, VMware SRM, Rubrik, Dell RecoverPoint for Virtual Machines and Commvault Cloud. See our AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. Zerto report.
See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors, best Cloud Backup vendors, and best Disaster Recovery (DR) Software vendors.
We monitor all Backup and Recovery 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.