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

Cohesity Data Cloud vs Quest Rapid Recovery 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)
Quest Rapid Recovery
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
37th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 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 Quest Rapid Recovery is 0.6%, up from 0.6% 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.
Adam Augustín - PeerSpot reviewer
Granular recovery, replication is good and offers good speed
It is for any kind of company that uses their own servers. From a global perspective, our clients are small-sized companies. All the SMEs, compared to the Slovakian market, are quite small. It's a small market with small companies. They just want to enhance security and follow regulations It's…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Our data center size occupancy for Cohesity appliance is reduced by 70% when we installed Cohesity."
"The hyper-converged architecture and scalability are hugely important for growing service companies."
"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."
"I find the most important feature to be data protection."
"It is easy to install and use."
"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."
"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."
"It's very regimented and fast. It does local backup, cloud backup, long-term coverage, and disaster recovery."
"The best feature of the solution is the user interface."
"The data protection strategy varies on a case-by-case basis, but overall, it's doing well."
"Just knowing that the data is easily recoverable is our ROI. It definitely lowers risk."
"One feature I found that's the most valuable in Quest Rapid Recovery is the VM standby feature which is very useful for my current customer. The solution also has a great replication feature. The third most valuable feature in Quest Rapid Recovery is the five-minute RPO and the fifteen-minute RTO. The solution is also very user-friendly."
"Probably the point-in-time recovery is most valuable. The other piece that is really nice is that you can mount a whole server at any point in time. So, you can mount the server with all the drives to a Z drive or something like that. It will just mount it all up, and your data is accessible right there on one drive, which is nice."
"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."
"The local mount utility is most valuable. I do restores fairly regularly. Thankfully, I have not ever lost an entire server that I've had to resurrect, but I certainly have people who erroneously saved over a file or have deleted a file. So, we've done that quite a bit. We still have the DL4000 appliance, and we had, kind of, extrapolated that out over a five-year period. Now, we're in year six, so we had to add storage, which we did as a SAN next to DL4000, but prior to adding in that extra storage, we, here and there, would run into situations where for whatever reason, it would want to be pulling a new base image, and then we would run out of storage. So, we would utilize the archive feature and archive the old data that we want to hang on to, but we don't necessarily need it taking up current data storage. Being able to export out really old data is most valuable to us. Then, we just store that on a NAS that we keep in another building."
"Definitely, the mount and recovery points are the most valuable, because if someone deletes a file or something, or if something gets corrupted, we can always revert back to an old change because our repository goes about a month back. The ability to roll back files and the ability to roll back servers is really important."
 

Cons

"There is limited support for legacy systems, which is something that could be improved."
"The pricing of the Cloud is on the higher side, and it should be cost-effective enough to compete with native solutions."
"Their documentation portal is not up to date for newer releases and I strongly recommend Cohesity to increase their efforts on the documentation portal."
"In terms of functionality, Helios has been effective, but sometimes it doesn't show the exact cluster name for backups."
"The initial setup can be complex, depending on the environment."
"The limitation that I see in Cohesity is that the minimum sized node is 36 terabytes, which is more than a small customer needs."
"The primary drawback is the need to transfer large amounts of data to the cloud via an internet connection, requiring significant bandwidth."
"The pricing of the Cloud is on the higher side, and it should be cost-effective enough to compete with native solutions."
"In case, if there is anything, it would be the speed of the operation to be finished. Even then, I can easily work on the storing function before the operation is finished."
"I don't really think that there is a whole lot that needs to be changed. It would be nice if you could deploy the agent without having to reboot. When I upgraded my core to the latest version, I also wanted to update all of my servers, but I had to put that off because I can't just shoot it out there. I have to make sure it is at a time when I can do a reboot right away."
"It is quite surprising to me that the configuration cannot be backed up automatically, and I think that Rapid Recovery should have an option for scheduled configuration backup."
"The terminology didn't seem easily available. When I go to the website, it is hard to search for things. You get all the articles, then you finally get the search button. They need the search at the top of the knowledge base. Then, on occasion, if you get an error message in the system, which is very important, it says, "Click here for more information," but I never get more information. The search engine doesn't find it or it is some weird error. It has never worked for me."
"The on-premises deployment model shouldn't have a maintenance fee. If there's going to be technical support, they need it to be free or it should be paid on upon adopting the solution."
"One area where Quest Rapid Recovery has room for improvement is in the handling of snapshots on Hyper-V."
"Sometimes, when we have certain batches for Windows, it needs to be restarted. When it's restarted, the service is configured as a delayed start. Sometimes, you need to wait too long until it rights itself, or you have to do it manually."
"For the most part, it is really good in terms of flexibility and choice of recovery methods. What we found lacking was being able to back up virtual volumes that are clustered. We ran out of luck there. There should be an option for backing up clustered virtual volumes."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Regarding pricing, it's very costly and I rate it a four."
"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."
"Its price is okay. It is reasonable in terms of the way it works."
"I don't think the licensing for the product is very expensive."
"Licensing fees are based on the amount of data that you want to store, which is related to how many customers you want to cover."
"I'm not aware of the exact cost of Quest Rapid Recovery because I'm from the technical team, but in general, the solution is quite competitive cost-wise."
"I believe the basic license comes with six terabytes, whereas a lot of the other ones are four terabytes. From the price point, it seemed a lot better than the comparative models, such as Datto, Barracuda, and some of the others. I believe Barracuda was about $15,000 for four terabytes, and Quest was around $12,000 for six terabytes. Pricing is based on the period. There is just the maintenance fee that you have to pay annually, or you can pay for a three-year or four-year contract. This includes Premier Support."
"It is a little expensive. However, I haven't compared it to other solutions. Being a nonprofit, it is always good to have nonprofit discounts on products."
"It's very expensive which is why I want to drop it. They charge us per core and we have a six-core server. It's expensive to pay for maintenance charges. I want to switch to something cheaper."
"The pricing is on the higher end."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 Quest Rapid Recovery?
The most valuable feature of Quest Rapid Recovery for our organization is the VM recovery functionality.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Quest Rapid Recovery?
Dell solutions are approximately 30% to 35% more expensive than Veeam.
 

Also Known As

Imanis Data, DataPlatform, Cohesity Helios
Dell AppAssure
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Navis, 1st Security Bank, Brown University, WestLotto
PRIME aerostructures GmbH, Tamworth Regional Council, Rhondda Housing Association, Stadtwerke Pforzheim GmbH & Co., Guangdong Aiyingdao Childrens Department Store, Nspyre, Tarrant Technology Partners, CloudRunner
Find out what your peers are saying about Cohesity Data Cloud vs. Quest Rapid Recovery and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.