No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

IBM Softek TDMF vs QoreStor comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 1, 2026

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

IBM Softek TDMF
Ranking in Data Replication
16th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
QoreStor
Ranking in Data Replication
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (50th), Disk Based Backup Systems (7th), Storage Software (4th), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (25th), Software Defined Storage (SDS) (18th), Copy Data Management (6th), File and Object Storage (22nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Data Replication category, the mindshare of IBM Softek TDMF is 3.1%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of QoreStor is 4.0%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Replication Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
QoreStor4.0%
IBM Softek TDMF3.1%
Other92.9%
Data Replication
 

Featured Reviews

it_user150294 - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy Manager- Datacenter & Cloud with 10,001+ employees
It very easy to setup and manage unless you have network problems.
There were restrictions when migrating from older to newer versions of Windows. As soon as the target disk is mounted on the higher level of Windows, NTFS file system will automatically be upgraded by Windows and will no longer be compatible with the source system. This means that migration cannot be resumed and a full refresh was needed to re-synchronize the source and target disks.
MW
Works at a financial services firm with 11-50 employees
Backup storage has shrunk dramatically with deduplication but still needs stronger security options
The air gap feature is something I'd really like to see in QoreStor. There's no native air gap capability right now, and for security-conscious environments, that's a gap. The configuration export is also limited in QoreStor. If you want to document your setup or migrate configuration to a new instance, it requires more manual work than it should.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"TDMF resolved these problems with easy and fast data migrations."
"We need revisions and safe backup so that it could be held up in court, but deduplication and compression are the main features why we have Quest QoreStor. That's where it really shines. I use ZFS and XFS at home, and Quest QoreStor is even better."
"QoreStor has helped us to reduce our backup storage requirements on-premises. We've been using the same devices for quite a while, and so it lets us keep using them as opposed to having to rip out all that hardware and create a new on-prem solution. The advantage here is even if we had to retire the hardware tomorrow, the QoreStor part doesn't change. We just have to have additional hardware and put the solution back on whatever hardware we pick and it'll do the same thing."
"Since we started to resell QoreStor, we have been using it internally; it's better than other backup solutions we have used or evaluated."
"The features we use for the data deduplication are nice because we're able to back up a much larger amount of data, yet it doesn't necessarily take up that much data on the devices."
"The extreme compression of data is a big thing for us. We were looking for an online backup solution, and QoreStor is very good in terms of data compression. It helps us minimize the required storage in the Blob Storage environment."
"Quest QoreStor is very stable compared to our previous solution."
"The dedupe and compression are pretty extreme. On disk, we're getting dedupe rates of up to 65 percent of data and compression of 34 percent. When you go to the cloud, it's more like 76 percent for dedupe and almost 50 percent for compression."
"If storage costs are a problem, whether on-premises or cloud, QoreStor is worth a serious look."
 

Cons

"Mobility Groups crashes sometimes and a re-synchronization were needed"
"The management interface is in need of improvement. The graphical user interface (GUI) for the web management tools appears clunky, and not super intuitive."
"They could improve on support a little bit. We have not had to engage their support much, but when we do have issues, it can take longer to get things resolved."
"They need to increase their maximum capacity. Other than that, they're doing a pretty good job."
"The installation could use improvement. The initial installation was a little touchy and it's not really user-installable. You have to have a connection to support to install."
"The importance of support is significant to me. I was working for a service provider, and all of our customers had a Quest or warning. Sometimes the support really underperforms."
"The air gap feature is something I'd really like to see in QoreStor."
"Overall, I am happy with this solution, but a way to export configuration settings would be beneficial. After everything is set up and configured, there should be a way to export the configuration. In case something happens to the QoreStor server, and we need to reinstall and configure everything, being able to import the configuration would be helpful. This feature does not currently exist."
"In terms of improvement, we would like to have an Air Gap feature to prevent a virus from attaching to something. So that when we don't do a backup, we want the QoreStor to stay offline. It would be a nice feature to have."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The pricing is good. It is competitive for a managed services provider. I like the ability to pay by the terabyte, allowing for an incremental cost that we and our customers can afford, so the solution grows with the customer."
"Its pricing model is very attractive. You have one price, and you get everything from QoreStor."
"Quest QoreStor's pricing is affordable. We evaluated Veeam, a well-known company for backup solutions, but found their pricing to be quite high. Veeam's price was almost double. For us, Quest QoreStor is very affordable."
"The cost is per terabyte, and overall, the cost was reasonable when compared to some competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Replication solutions are best for your needs.
911,839 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What else besides data replication does QoreStor offer?
Quest QoreStor can be used for multiple things besides data replication. For example, it can be trusted to make a backup of your data. You know that replication and backups are different, right? Re...
How does Quest QoreStore protect your data?
One of our favorite features of Quest QoreStore for data protection isn't the backup, actually, though we're using it actively (maybe just as much as data replication, to be honest). We absolutely ...
How does Quest QoreStore solve repetitive data replicas?
When I first found out about data replication and the many benefits it had, I couldn't help but wonder - what about the copies you don't need? Like it's unavoidable for some of the copies to get da...
 

Also Known As

Softek TDMF
QoreStor
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

BT
American Airlines, at&t, Bank of America. Barclays, ebay, Ford
Find out what your peers are saying about NetApp, Fivetran, Dell Technologies and others in Data Replication. Updated: August 2026.
911,839 professionals have used our research since 2012.