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

OpenText Recover​ vs Precisely Assure QuickEDD comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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

OpenText Recover​
Ranking in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software
26th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Precisely Assure QuickEDD
Ranking in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software
31st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Disaster Recovery (DR) Software category, the mindshare of OpenText Recover​ is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Precisely Assure QuickEDD is 1.6%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Disaster Recovery (DR) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Recover​0.7%
Precisely Assure QuickEDD1.6%
Other97.7%
Disaster Recovery (DR) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Rias Majeed - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at Exceed NetSec LLC
Allows you to test and schedule recovery tasks for multiple sites
The main weakness of Carbonite Recover is the fallback process, which can be time-consuming. However, the failover process works well when done properly. Similar to other software programs, there was a technical issue involving duplicates and small glitches. Over time, Carbonite recovery has improved. When I started working with Cyber, we had to double-check everything, and although it was challenging, the downtime wasn't extensive—one incident in a year, for example. Restoring data with Carbonite Recover can take time, mainly because the backup process occurs in real time. The main concern is the duration needed to restore data to the primary environment, which can be lengthy. However, once the failover is complete, there are no further issues.
reviewer2325741 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Information Technology at a construction company with 1-10 employees
Trustworthy and provides good availability
Our administrator found the solution easy to use, but once that administrator left, it felt very overwhelming to the individual who took it over. It could be more of a knowledge transfer situation that didn't happen, but we didn't know if it was easy to use. Precisely Assure QuickEDD is deployed on the cloud in our organization. The implementation of QLED helped us with our recovery time objective and was a seamless transition. In order to utilize the product to its fullest potential, users should be knowledgeable of what it offers. They should also form a relationship with the person who is their representative. Overall, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We confirm the server failure before initiating recovery. Once started, this process takes half an hour to an hour, though it can be as fast as 15 minutes. After bringing up the server, we test connectivity to ensure everything is operational."
"Synchronous applications are valuable."
"Its initial setup is fine; it is straightforward and easy."
"The most valuable feature of Precisely Assure QuickEDD is the backup system."
 

Cons

"The main weakness of Carbonite Recover is the fallback process, which can be time-consuming. However, the failover process works well when done properly. Similar to other software programs, there was a technical issue involving duplicates and small glitches."
"There should be more interactive dashboards."
"It is expensive. The cost varies based on your requirements."
"Our administrator found the solution easy to use, but once that administrator left, it felt very overwhelming to the individual who took it over."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It is expensive. The cost varies based on your requirements. If you want to manage it, there is an extra cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions are best for your needs.
885,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Carbonite Recover?
The main weakness of Carbonite Recover is the fallback process, which can be time-consuming. However, the failover process works well when done properly. Similar to other software programs, there w...
What is your primary use case for Carbonite Recover?
Carbonite Recover is an effective tool for testing and scheduling recovery tasks for multiple sites, whether they have primary servers or virtual machines. You can schedule jobs for recovery at the...
What advice do you have for others considering Carbonite Recover?
Carbonite Recover is a downtime reduction solution that minimizes the time employees cannot work. Carbonite Recover can accurately measure how much potential productivity or revenue is saved per ho...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Syncsort Assure QuickEDD, Syncsort Quick-EDD/HA, Quick-EDD/HA
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Toyota Material Handling Australia, Westpac Pacific Banking, Symphony Health, Wimbledon, OCBC Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Veeam Software, Broadcom and others in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software. Updated: March 2026.
885,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.