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

Dell CloudBoost vs Druva Phoenix comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 3, 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

Dell CloudBoost
Ranking in Cloud Backup
60th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Druva Phoenix
Ranking in Cloud Backup
32nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Disaster Recovery as a Service (7th), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (18th), SaaS Backup (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Cloud Backup category, the mindshare of Dell CloudBoost is 0.2%, down from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Druva Phoenix is 0.8%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Backup
 

Featured Reviews

SK
Stable solution with a wider boost functionality, helping us eliminate the tape backup requirements
We use the solution to protect the applications running in the cloud or on-premises. Its wider boost functionality helps us eliminate the tape backup requirements The solution's most valuable feature is throttling the applications as per the bandwidth. Using it, we can adapt a method to work on…
Ratnodeep Roy - PeerSpot reviewer
Patch-based system, offers network flexibility but Logs are not very informative for regular users
The ransomware features are limited in Druva. There's a lot of improvement needed. It should extend to Nutanix and Hyper-V. It should extend to Azure as well. A lot of people are looking for ransomware scans, but Druva doesn't support them. Veeam barely supports them over Azure Virtual Machines. It doesn't support Linux Virtual Machines. NetApp and Commvault don't have such features. Acronis is also limited. In Azure, you have Azure Defender, but that works extensively on cloud storage, not on the servers. So, backup companies like Druva need to work a lot on ransomware protection and detection. These companies need to work a lot on ransomware detection, protection and more. Ransomware protection doesn't work in this hash-based transfer mirroring. If I only have to find this hash and feed it to the Druva end. It's sometimes not possible. It will struggle when the workloads are more than a hundred machines. It's not possible to find the hash of each file and provide it to Druva. So, this needs to be fully automated. If I were scanning with some technology, maybe signature-based scanning, behavioral-based, or keyword-based scanning. I can put this FHA, maybe SIEMs as well. But Druva is very limited. It's already in an active stage. I don't like that they don't extend all the features to all the workloads. These features are minimal compared to those of its competitors. For instance, I have one customer who was looking for Druva, but since they have Azure machines, they couldn't find a way to restore a particular file. Druva doesn't provide Azure virtual machine single file restore. It doesn't make sense to build a product and then it doesn't support it. Customers really struggle. Some customers tried Druva so that they don't have to think about setting up a separate network, but Druva is making things critical by not providing all the things at once and gradually releasing them. It's been more than six months or one year since they started their virtual machines, but there is no single file restore. Every time you have to restore the VM, and then from there, you can get the file. Why would people go with Druva if they have to manage backup machines? Nowadays, backup product companies need to be aggressive and adopt themselves in this highly changing world of AI and ML.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"My customer has Dell EMC CloudBoost integrated with all of their other Dell products. It integrates well."
"The solution's support team is excellent."
"Once you set it up and you tell it exactly what needs to be backed up, you literally forget about it. It sends you emails and notifications of the current status of the jobs."
"Druva Phoenix is easy to use and easy to start with."
"I would definitively say that we have been able to make our people more productive by at least 30%."
"The initial setup was very straightforward."
"I found the cost-effectiveness of Druva Phoenix to be its most valuable feature, especially when compared to on-premises backup solutions."
"The most valuable features of Druva Phoenix are the simple portal to log in and flexibility."
"It's patch-based, so you don't have to bother about the backup server or the repository."
 

Cons

"They should eliminate the tape-out function from the solution."
"Druva Phoenix is optimized to work with x86 platforms, making it unsuitable for backing up non-x86 architectures like AIX. The solution is primarily designed for physical Linux and Windows systems based on the x86 architecture, as well as virtualized Windows and Linux environments. However, if you have an AIX system, it cannot be deployed in the cloud, and therefore, backing it up in the cloud is not a concern."
"The product's pricing needs to be improved."
"There is room for improvement in the reporting aspect of Druva Phoenix."
"The ransomware features are limited in Druva. There's a lot of improvement needed. It should extend to Nutanix and Hyper-V. It should extend to Azure as well."
"Druva Phoenix should include a few reporting features that it doesn't provide currently."
"They were able to give us a very reasonable price considering we were non-for-profit organizations, however, there is always room for improvement on that cost."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its cost depends upon the amount of data that needs to be protected."
"The price of Dell EMC CloudBoost could be reduced, it is expensive."
"It's very costly. Normal people wouldn't understand how their credits are calculated. It's pretty complex."
"We’ve had experience with the data center for a while and we have had solutions that were able to support older versions of the operating systems that we needed. I would like for Druva to support it as well."
"Druva Phoenix's pricing is based on the service provided, and it's reasonable. The cost of the service will depend on the size of your data and the number of virtual machines being backed up. However, the pricing structure is straightforward and easy to understand."
"I assume clients use Druva Phoenix because it is cheaper than other products."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Backup solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Druva Phoenix?
Druva Phoenix is easy to use and easy to start with.
What needs improvement with Druva Phoenix?
Druva Phoenix could be improved if they provided bare metal recovery for physical servers, which would be beneficial for server deployment.
What is your primary use case for Druva Phoenix?
The typical use case for Druva Phoenix depends on multiple workloads. If a customer wants a simple solution where we can manage the entire workload, or they want to back up with agent plus backup, ...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

No data available
CloudRanger
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
TRC Companies, Family Health Network, GulfMark Offshore, Pall Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Dell CloudBoost vs. Druva Phoenix and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.