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

Cohesity Data Cloud vs IBM Storage Protect 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

Cohesity Data Cloud
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
39th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Backup (35th), Data Management Platforms (DMP) (6th)
IBM Storage Protect
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
40th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of Cohesity Data Cloud is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Storage Protect is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

AmarpreetSingh - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers improved data protection and security with indirect ROI
The pricing of the Cloud is on the higher side, and it should be cost-effective enough to compete with native solutions. Currently, Cohesity Cloud seems very costly compared to native backups. Although this is an emerging tool and there is room for growth, it needs to mature further. There is an AI feature, however, it is still in the development phase and requires substantial improvements.
Maik Zutz - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable enterprise solution for backup and restore
New workloads are not good for storage protect like container or virtual machines. IBM acknowledges that users and partners with companies do it better and integrate it into the product. It takes too much time to implement it in old Storage Protect. It have features for big databases and big data environments. Although, the product seems to be old fashioned, but it is stable, robust and works for the most use cases where a lot of data is to be protected. It could be easier to manage client data. You have to use configuration. It is not on modern architecture. They should change it on the client area. You can achieve a better environment using Protect. IBM tapes serves as an air gap, consumes less energy, and provides a resilient, stable environment with fewer infrastructure and environmental costs. Intergrating it can help store large amounts of data more cheaper than on disk.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I definitely recommend this tool to others due to its simplicity, security, features, and flexibility."
"We use Cohesity Helios primarily in our data management strategy for backup and reporting."
"It is easy to install and use."
"It's very regimented and fast. It does local backup, cloud backup, long-term coverage, and disaster recovery."
"The clone feature is very nice. You can restore workloads onto Cohesity's storage, which is also nice to have when you don't have enough space to restore on the server."
"Its big data and archive data features are the features that I have found most valuable. I can use it in a big virtual environment."
"Our data center size occupancy for Cohesity appliance is reduced by 70% when we installed Cohesity."
"I rate the Cohesity Data Cloud solution a ten out of ten. It's an easy-to-use product that provides substantial value and security."
"The best point about IBM Storage Protect is that it can use IBM tape environments, which we still use and will continue to use in the future."
"Overall, my experience with the solution is very positive, and I rate it a 9 out of 10."
"The tool's backup engine is very powerful. Previously, our client finished backup with HPE product in 48 hours. IBM Storage Protect completes backup in 8 hours."
 

Cons

"The primary drawback is the need to transfer large amounts of data to the cloud via an internet connection, requiring significant bandwidth."
"In terms of functionality, Helios has been effective, but sometimes it doesn't show the exact cluster name for backups."
"Their documentation portal is not up to date for newer releases and I strongly recommend Cohesity to increase their efforts on the documentation portal."
"The pricing of the Cloud is on the higher side, and it should be cost-effective enough to compete with native solutions."
"The pricing of the Cloud is on the higher side, and it should be cost-effective enough to compete with native solutions."
"The limitation that I see in Cohesity is that the minimum sized node is 36 terabytes, which is more than a small customer needs."
"It has never been touted as a tier-one storage platform, and that would be a benefit. They are currently working on solving that issue."
"The initial setup can be complex, depending on the environment."
"The solution is expensive."
"The product should improve its GUI. It should also support Windows clustering."
"Some features are outdated as the product does not use the latest technologies. The graphical user interface, known as the operation center, is not very well designed. Additionally, IBM Storage Protect does not work well with virtual environments such as VMware and Hyper-V."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Competing products sometimes use deceptive marketing to make their products seem a lot cheaper. Comparing apples-to-apples, DataPlatform wins out."
"It's priced properly for the market."
"Regarding pricing, it's very costly and I rate it a four."
"IBM Storage Protect is not expensive and fits the needs of all business types. The licensing is based on a capacity-based model. You can take a license for one, two, or three terabytes."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
24%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cohesity DataPlatform?
While Cohesity Data Cloud is more costly in the long term compared to physical tapes, it offers value by meeting compliance needs and providing protection against ransomware attacks. The pricing is...
What needs improvement with Cohesity Imanis Data?
The primary drawback is the need to transfer large amounts of data to the cloud via an internet connection, requiring significant bandwidth. Reading data from the cloud can incur additional costs, ...
What is your primary use case for Cohesity Imanis Data?
The primary use case for Cohesity Data Cloud is to offer an additional layer of protection for backup data, which I can restore if needed. It is a managed service that allows me to set up and confi...
What do you like most about IBM Storage Protect?
The best point about IBM Storage Protect is that it can use IBM tape environments, which we still use and will continue to use in the future.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Storage Protect?
IBM Storage Protect is generally an expensive tool. However, with good contracts with IBM or its partners, the cost might not be so high. New customers can expect very high prices.
What needs improvement with IBM Storage Protect?
Some features are outdated as the product does not use the latest technologies. The graphical user interface, known as the operation center, is not very well designed. Additionally, IBM Storage Pro...
 

Also Known As

Imanis Data, DataPlatform, Cohesity Helios
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Navis, 1st Security Bank, Brown University, WestLotto
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cohesity Data Cloud vs. IBM Storage Protect and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.