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

Commvault 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

Commvault Cloud
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
110
Ranking in other categories
eDiscovery (3rd), Cloud Backup (3rd), Disaster Recovery as a Service (3rd), File Archiving (2nd), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (3rd), SaaS Backup (1st), Threat Deception Platforms (1st), Container Backup Software (1st)
Quest Rapid Recovery
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
36th
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 May 2025, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of Commvault Cloud is 7.5%, up from 5.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Quest Rapid Recovery is 0.6%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

Cassandra Cinar - PeerSpot reviewer
Provides excellent visibility and helps reduce costs and time
We use intuitive administrative tools that readily reveal the volume of backed-up data. Our Commvault CommCell servers alert us to failed backups and provide detailed information. This transparency allows our managed service provider to easily grasp our pre-established thresholds and readily scale up with new technologies. We're highly satisfied with Commvault's automated data security and management policies. They meet our stringent requirements for secure and private data storage, including anti-ransomware protection and encryption. Notably, they also ensure compliance with GDPR for backups stored in Europe and other regions, fulfilling our regulatory obligations. Threat Scan's ability to scan backup data for threats is invaluable because it proactively identifies and neutralizes certain viruses and threats that may originate from our G Suite or be reported by our security incident response team, preventing potential outages. Commvault provides excellent visibility across our entire organization's data. They perform regular health checks, informing us of areas of strength and offering recommendations for improvement. These recommendations may include upgrading to newer product versions or addressing issues identified during the checks. It is important for our organization that Commvault provides a unified platform for recovery across cloud, on-premises, and software-as-a-service workloads. This is particularly important because many of our existing cloud environments rely on basic backups that are insufficient for our needs. Commvault empowers us to address this issue. We have implemented it not only in our own operating company but also across the corporate structure, rolling it out to virtually all AWS users. This is because the standard backup methods, such as snapshot backups, fail to meet our stringent requirements for recovery, service level agreements, and crucial functionalities like threat detection and other security features. Commvault ensures a robust and comprehensive backup infrastructure that satisfies all our essential needs. It has improved our organization by ensuring we meet our infrastructure requirements, adhere to our vulnerability methodology, and achieve service level agreements for both backup and storage requirements. The quarterly risk analysis allows us to effectively manage the lifecycle of both data and backups. It also sheds light on the types of data and backups we have, providing valuable insights. Commvault's risk analysis is one of the tools we use to meet our compliance requirements and implement the necessary controls for immediate security policy action. To ensure comprehensive data protection and comply with international regulations like GDPR, we rely on Commvault alongside our established financial systems and SOC-compliant practices. Commvault has helped us reduce our organization's data management costs by 75 percent, particularly for long-term backups. We ditched tapes and virtual tapes thanks to Commvault, replacing them with a fully disk-based backup system and cloud backups in AWS and Azure. By implementing Commvault, we've significantly reduced our backup times. This is achieved through a combination of incremental backups and data aging. Aged data is then moved to cheaper disk or cloud storage, ensuring cost-effective long-term retention while still meeting our recovery SLAs. While the overall time savings may be around 10-15 percent, the main benefit is not keeping everything on expensive primary storage and efficiently aging it out. Consequently, retrieving data from the Azure bucket typically takes five days or more, reflecting our agreed-upon SLA. It has reduced our recovery point objective, allowing us to store more backups. However, new regulatory and compliance requirements mandate that some backups cannot be deleted and must be retained indefinitely. To address this while still improving efficiency, we've implemented solutions for long-term data storage and improved data management practices. Commvault has helped our organization not only decrease our threat detection time but also improve threat prevention to such an extent that we often avoid facing the full impact of a threat altogether. By preventing these incidents, we're often unsure of the precise amount of time saved, but the benefit is clear: we don't need to activate disaster recovery mechanisms. It has not only helped us reduce our recovery time objective, but it has also ensured that our backups and long-term storage are secure, thanks to its comprehensive capabilities. In terms of total cost of ownership, Commvault has enabled us to significantly reduce both hardware and media costs for storage and backup. After factoring in encryption and compression, the total savings amount to close to 80 percent. It has been able to reduce downtime, but having a quick recovery plan and policy and SLAs that are published are met regularly.
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

"In the VM, we have Live Recovery, Live Mount, and Live Sync."
"I like the product because of its simplicity and the fact that it provides one single interface for managing everything, including storage, data, and policies."
"The use of hyperscale storage hardware and Commvault software has allowed us to create a large storage pool and achieve significant savings in our back-end storage costs."
"There are many valuable features of Commvault HyperScale X giving many possibilities to complete jobs."
"The solution is very stable and offers a good level of performance."
"We use Commvault Command Center for backups and restores and for the creation of new clients. We use it for other functionalities as well. In terms of VMware, I can go directly to the Command Center, enter VMware, and I can search it directly. Command Center is very useful and it can be used for more advanced techniques."
"The most valuable features of Commvault HyperScale X are all the general functions and the performance."
"It's very easy to set up the storage across all platforms. This allows us to be dynamic and change on-the-fly."
"Just knowing that the data is easily recoverable is our ROI. It definitely lowers risk."
"The compression and deduplication features have helped to save on storage costs."
"The most valuable feature is the disaster recovery process from the data center."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is its ability to back up a physical server to another physical or virtual server."
"It is more fully integrated with the hypervisor, particularly with VMware solution, and it is simple to create replica sets to our VR site."
"The solution offers a 100% guarantee that if it's backed up you will be able to restore it onto any platform you want."
"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."
"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."
 

Cons

"There could be improvements to the backup failures."
"I really struggled to configure HyperScale X as there was a lack of detailed documentation."
"Sometimes, we have a performance issue with the backup speed. So, that has to be rectified and improved."
"The tool should revise its licensing."
"When you deploy Complete Data Protection for past services, it's more complicated because you cannot directly back up from the previous service host. We have to build a proxy server, like a middleware, to directly access the past database server. It's complex and hard for beginners to figure out."
"We've run into some issues when attempting to restore very large numbers of files. Of course, that's more of a design issue."
"One issue we face is the complexity of the console. That could be improved on. It takes users time to get familiar with Commvault. On average, it takes our customers between one and three months to learn it. The console and the way you configure Commvault have very advanced settings. It takes time to understand how it works."
"They can improve the security level for Windows. When mapping to the Windows, Commvault can take full control over data volumes so that the attacker can't delete the volume data, but the Windows admin can access the volumes. It would be great to block access at that level."
"The initial setup can be tricky, and if not done right, the whole solution needs to be reinstalled."
"When you do a full backup, all of the memory resources on the server are used, which is something that should be improved."
"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."
"You can only take a snapshot from a virtual environment. It should have the ability to take snapshots from both a virtual and physical environment."
"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."
"It's buggy. That's a big problem. We're arranging to get rid of it. We're going to switch to Veeam."
"I think the self-paced learning and knowledge base can always be improved so that users can self-service without having to contact either a reseller or Quest. I know there are things that I would have been looking for to try and solve. And the only way I could get there was to actually open a ticket rather than go through self-service through the portal."
"One area where Quest Rapid Recovery has room for improvement is in the handling of snapshots on Hyper-V."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We like that there is no extra cost for SharePoint, Teams, or OneDrive. It is all mimicking Microsoft's model. Every user has one terabyte of space. When users start using OneDrive, everybody has one terabyte that will be backed up included in the price."
"The price is a little bit high."
"The tool is cost-effective."
"The solution is bundled with hardware licensing. If I want to increase the hardware, I have to buy exactly the same because it's based on the core hardware license. We cannot tell discount because we have an NDA signed with Commvault because of my academic license. The solution is more expensive than NetBackup and Veeam but cheaper than Rubrik."
"Everyone else offers the subscription-based model nowadays, while Commvault Complete Data Protection still has the traditional license model, where you must buy a set of licenses. You pay for one hundred licenses even if you only use fifty virtual machines, so the licensing model needs improvement."
"In India, this is a very expensive product."
"Commvault's pricing model and pricing structure were initially confusing, but once we worked more closely with the company, we were able to transition to a subscription license that saved us a lot of money."
"It is not the cheapest solution. I think the pricing is fair for mid-side customers. It is between all the other options."
"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."
"When I purchased the change to the license, it was $1,600. I think that was for changing the license. I don't believe that I had to purchase technical support in a while, so I must've bought maybe for five years, but I don't feel there was a huge cost involved in technical support. Its cost was definitely worth it because we've had a fantastic experience with them."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Its price is okay. It is reasonable in terms of the way it works."
"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.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Real Estate/Law Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Commvault?
The tool is affordable. I rate the pricing a six out of ten. Implementation requires additional costs because we need Commvault Professional Services.
What needs improvement with Commvault?
Data center backup must be improved. We also want the product to provide us with a cloud-based backup. If we use Microsoft Exchange Online for email services, we want to know how to get a backup in...
What do you like most about Commvault Complete Data Protection?
IntelliSnap and file system backups are valuable features.
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

Commvault Complete Data Protection, Commvault Backup & Recovery, Commvault HyperScale X, Metallic, ThreatWise
Dell AppAssure
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aberdeenshire Council, Acxiom, BAM Group Ireland, Catholic Education Diocese of Parramatta, CI Investments, Clifford Chance, American Municipal Power, American Pacific Mortgage, AstraZeneca, Dongbu Steel, Denver Health, Dow Jones, Emirates Steel, Penn State Health, Prime Healthcare, Sonic Healthcare, Sony Network Communications, TiVO, UCONN Health, The Weitz Company
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 Commvault Cloud vs. Quest Rapid Recovery and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.