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

IBM Spectrum Protect vs OpenText Data Protector 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

IBM Spectrum Protect
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
149
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Data Protector
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
22nd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
102
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of IBM Spectrum Protect is 2.2%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Data Protector is 0.7%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

Syed Habib - PeerSpot reviewer
Manageable and comprehensive and integrates robust backup features for core banking
It's adequate for my core banking, however, I am looking for another solution for all systems. It is not compatible with other operating systems like Windows or Linux, and lacks a consolidated dashboard from Browser Spectrum. This is why I am searching for another solution. The product also lacks any centralized graphical user interface (GUI), such as Jarek Pod, and I am limited to using a console-based text user interface, which my local partner handles completely.
Jeroen Vranckaerts - PeerSpot reviewer
Though a highly stable tool, it needs to be made easier to use and configure
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a five out of ten. OpenText Data Protector is complex to configure correctly, but the areas concerning the data and compression are good. Once you get the product to work, it works, but it's much too complex to configure and troubleshoot, as it takes a lot of time and energy, making it not so efficient. Once the tool is configured in your environment, it provides good backup and compression features. In my company, we use OpenText Data Protector as a backup for our servers, and we have a team of 20 people to take care of the data backup using the tool. My company doesn't use OpenText Data Protector as a backup for our client's computers. In my company, we have scheduled the process related to backup, which makes the tool run daily around 30 to 40 times.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We've found the product to be quite stable and the performance is very good."
"We are able to run it in an enterprise quite easily with one or two resources."
"It saves you a lot of storage."
"The most valuable feature is the backup speed."
"It is good in terms of functionality. My clients are very satisfied with this solution."
"Enterprise-wide type of architecture supports a lot of different platforms."
"It is scalable beyond anything my customers ever aspire to."
"Our performance is better."
"What I like the most about this solution is that I can change and access the Oracle backup file."
"It is a traditional backup model. If you talk about file server and the official Windows database, it's a stable product."
"The solution allows us to be able to backup and exchange directly, to backup Microsoft exchange."
"The tool's most valuable aspect is its ease of management. It was not complex. In terms of features, I can mention a couple of things. For example, if you need to restore a VM, you can do it with multiple streams in OpenText Data Protector, which is an advantage over Commvault, from what I've noticed, having worked with multiple tools. Another thing is the Oracle backups; configuring Oracle backups is much easier in OpenText Data Protector."
"The reliability of HP Data Protector is the most valuable feature for us."
"In one of the projects involving a database and UCMDB integration, we needed to manage a large database. We used the scheduling feature in Data Protector to automate backups."
"The stability of the product seems to be quite good."
"The initial setup is very easy."
 

Cons

"Perhaps some better documentation, which I believe was better in the past."
"We cannot take VMware backups for our banking data center environment."
"Integration with some applications in the healthcare field could be added, as that is a big part of our business."
"In a future release, it would be a benefit to have the ability to add an application as a storage target, as a storage pool. Additionally, they should add more functionality to the administration for the Operation Center."
"Generally, the implementation of virtualization could be improved. The workflow service and so on are not working properly."
"It does what we need it to do, but it could be better with VM backups. It could be better integrated with virtual machines or VM backups, but that's why they have their Plus out now. Plus version is more geared toward VM backups. The regular version is more for endpoint clients."
"There needs to be a bit more automation."
"I am not really impressed with the Level 1 support, but once I get past that and go to Level 2, then we will usually get some type of resolution."
"It has a lot of undeveloped functions like window searching and patent searching, and within the main backup processes like VMware and Microsoft Exchange. It's completely not user-friendly, and it has no built-in antivirus software. In my opinion, Micro Focus Data Protector is not an enterprise level solution."
"We faced some certification issues after we upgraded to version 10.2."
"I would like to see a better user interface in the next release."
"The downside of the flexibility on offer is if you over-configure it, it may fail to function as some configurations may not match."
"In SAP restoration, we faced issues with changing the SIDs and changing the path for every backup object. It is quite a lengthy process to do that."
"The interface has been the same for many years and needs to be updated"
"I don't like this solution so much because it's very technical and compared to Commvault and Veeam, it's not so user-friendly. The interface needs improvement."
"It would be ideal if they could improve their level of support."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing fees are on a yearly basis, which for us it is about R400,000 (approximately $27,000 USD)."
"Regarding retro-compatibility of the product between versions, your data is always available and the ROI is unquestionable."
"Spectrum Protect is not expensive, and it is simple to use."
"Technical support is pretty good. It is doing fine, but you pay for it."
"The product is low cost. It is very cool when we design it to using licensing based on post capacity."
"We pay for a terabyte license to support our backend usage."
"The licensing fees are between $8,000 and $10,000 per year."
"The pricing is a little expensive for our current employer, so they want to move to a cheaper solution."
"We have many competitors who are pricing better, and we believe that our pricing is higher."
"Avoid using many LTO drives; when using fewer drives, the price will be extremely good."
"The licensing cost is too high."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor very cheap."
"The pricing is acceptable for enterprise level companies, but it's not acceptable for small- and medium-sized businesses. Micro Focus Data Protector is not an enterprise level solution, and it should cover small- and medium-sized businesses with acceptable prices."
"Data Protector's pricing is very competitive and we have no issues in this regard. I would give it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."
"The solution requires paying for a license."
"Pricing/licensing is Data Protector's single best offering. In its most basic environment, the only license required is for whatever target device is required."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
8%
Educational Organization
8%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Performing Arts
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM Spectrum Protect?
One point for improvement for IBM Spectrum Protect is security, as IBM has not been investing as much as in the past. There is a need for additional layers of security to fill the gaps, which is wh...
What do you like most about Micro Focus Data Protector?
I haven't experienced any crashes while using the solution...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Data Protector?
The solution is expensive as it requires purchasing all features without the option to negotiate based on client numbers, unlike Veeam which offers flexibility in pricing.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Data Protector?
OpenText Data Protector is not user-friendly, especially for cloud backup. It lacks functions and facilities compared to Veeam, which offers more user-friendliness for virtual machine backups. Ther...
 

Also Known As

IBM TSM, IBM Tivoli Storage Manager
Micro Focus Data Protector, Data Protector, OmniBack, HPE Data Protector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CERN, Einstein Healthcare, Nyherji, Allianz Australia, TZM, ABT Online, NCT, Kindred Healthcare Inc., Cobalt Iron, TransGrid, Baptist Health of Northeast Florida, Cash America, Piedmont Healthcare, RWGV, Arkansas Tech University, British Columbia Institute of Technology
GSK Vaccines, Repsol, Vodafone Group, Siemens AG, Medium Enterprise Transportation Services Company
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Spectrum Protect vs. OpenText Data Protector and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.