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

Cohesity DataProtect vs HPE StoreOnce comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.9
Organizations report cost savings, reduced downtime, improved efficiency, and lower costs with Cohesity DataProtect, enhancing threat protection.
Sentiment score
7.2
HPE StoreOnce users benefit from reduced costs, faster data recovery, scalability, and often achieve ROI in under three years.
Using Cohesity DataProtect is easier to manage, and it simplifies various components into one architecture, reducing the need for extensive human resources to manage backups.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.9
Cohesity DataProtect customer service is praised for fast, knowledgeable support, though occasional time zone delays are noted.
Sentiment score
7.6
HPE StoreOnce's customer service is praised for responsiveness and expertise, though some suggest improved response times and complex query knowledge.
The support can depend on the region, and for larger customers, I advise having a Technical Account Manager for better assistance.
HPE's support is very good, proactive, and monitored through InfoSight.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Cohesity DataProtect offers seamless scalability for diverse workloads, excelling in capacity expansion across various data centers.
Sentiment score
7.4
HPE StoreOnce is scalable and integrates well, supporting large data demands, though cost can be a concern when expanding.
Cohesity DataProtect is built on a scale-out architecture, which means it can effectively scale to meet various needs.
The scalability of HPE StoreOnce is very good.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Cohesity DataProtect is stable and reliable, with strong support, efficient backups, and effective handling of power failures.
Sentiment score
7.6
HPE StoreOnce is highly stable, with resolved issues and excellent integration, earning high user ratings for reliability.
On the whole, any problems were more related to hardware limitations rather than issues with Cohesity DataProtect itself.
 

Room For Improvement

Cohesity DataProtect needs improvements in recovery, UI, integration, documentation, application support, pricing, security, and update processes.
HPE StoreOnce needs better deduplication, integration, and security alongside improved performance, user interface, support, and cost efficiency.
While there are improvements to be made, such as providing support for older systems like IBM iSeries and tandem systems from HP, the solution overall shifts from older methods to modern practices.
It is well-positioned on the radar, with a mature and stable solution.
While the solution does everything expected, it would be beneficial if AI could be integrated for optimization and monitoring.
 

Setup Cost

Cohesity DataProtect provides competitive pricing with bundled services, offering cost-effectiveness despite potentially higher list prices.
HPE StoreOnce pricing is competitive but seen as high with mixed satisfaction, influencing its perceived value against competitors.
I find Cohesity DataProtect to be expensive.
The solution is quite expensive, possibly rated around seven and a half on a scale of one to ten.
 

Valuable Features

Cohesity DataProtect excels in fast recovery, seamless integration, easy setup, and offers strong data management and ransomware protection.
HPE StoreOnce excels in deduplication, improving storage efficiency, backup speeds, and integration, offering flexible, cost-effective data management.
The platform is based on a scale-out architecture with each node having compute, RAM, SSD, and HDD.
Some of the most valuable features of Cohesity DataProtect for me include instant mass restore, anomaly detection, and its ability to handle large data volumes effectively.
The most effective features for data deduplication are maximizing storage capacity and minimizing expenditure.
The recovery is important.
 

Categories and Ranking

Cohesity DataProtect
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
73
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (8th), Cloud Backup (6th)
HPE StoreOnce
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
107
Ranking in other categories
Deduplication Software (2nd), Disk Based Backup Systems (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Cohesity DataProtect and HPE StoreOnce aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Cohesity DataProtect is designed for Backup and Recovery and holds a mindshare of 3.4%, down 4.4% compared to last year.
HPE StoreOnce, on the other hand, focuses on Deduplication Software, holds 19.3% mindshare, up 17.9% since last year.
Backup and Recovery
Deduplication Software
 

Featured Reviews

Giovanni Golinelli. - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use, offers good scalability and responsive support
The deployment depends on the environment. Deploying on VMs is relatively simple. But for most of our customers, we implement physical clusters with at least three configured hosts using the existing model. So, it depends on the setup. Implementing DataProtect itself wasn't particularly challenging. One key requirement for successful DataProtect deployment is proper network configuration. If the network setup isn't right, you won't achieve optimal performance. We have developed a service for some of our customers where they implement an appliance or physical cluster of Cohesity at the customer site. Then, we use cloud clustering to replicate, and even in production, a second copy of the protected data. And in some cases, we have developed some disaster recovery procedures using Cohesity.
Andrew Mcbeath - PeerSpot reviewer
Maximized storage capacity and minimized costs and an easy setup
Most of our client base is between fifty to five hundred end users. We occasionally recommend high-end HPE products for larger clients needing performance and reliability. Our clients predominantly use HPE StoreOnce for small business purposes in industries like dairy and finance Our clients have…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
40%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cohesity DataProtect?
Several features enable us to perform fast recovery, such as instant fast recovery. All our virtual machines protected with the product can be quickly restored to another healthy environment with m...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cohesity DataProtect?
Typically on-premises nodes/clusters are deployed for primary backup (to enable instant mass restore) so price will be dependent on chosen OEM and capacity required. MSPs like us utilise PPU licens...
What needs improvement with Cohesity DataProtect?
While there are improvements to be made, such as providing support for older systems like IBM iSeries and tandem systems from HP, the solution overall shifts from older methods to modern practices....
What do you like most about HPE StoreOnce?
I think StoreOnce's deduplication technology is crucial for cost efficiency and faster recovery, especially for backup and data protection purposes.
What needs improvement with HPE StoreOnce?
Veeam Backups provide a stronger capability. It is well-positioned on the radar, with a mature and stable solution. Consequently, it is used throughout the company.
 

Also Known As

Cohesity
HP StoreOnce
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Tribune Media
Eurobank Serbia
Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Zerto, Commvault and others in Backup and Recovery. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.