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

Quest Rapid Recovery vs Quorum OnQ 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

Quest Rapid Recovery
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
37th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Quorum OnQ
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
47th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Backup (36th), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of Quest Rapid Recovery is 0.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Quorum OnQ is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

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…
Mohamed Iqbal - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and economical solution that provides quick disaster recovery
The most valuable feature of Quorum OnQ is quick recovery. We call it a single-click recovery. If any server goes down, crashes, or experiences downtime, we can bring up the DR (Disaster Recovery) server in just two minutes. We also have a "Single Pane of Glass," wherein we work with only a single window. You don't have to use multiple windows to perform basic tasks like failover or failback.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Just knowing that the data is easily recoverable is our ROI. It definitely lowers risk."
"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 general backup for replication and virtual standby are the most valuable aspects. It does what it says it does. It's a decent tool for not a big budget."
"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."
"The fact that it can take a snapshot of everything on a server and replicate it on another server in real-time is the most valuable feature."
"The data protection strategy varies on a case-by-case basis, but overall, it's doing well."
"Built-in encryption helps to secure our data as it travels from our on-site server to our off-site backup server."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is its ability to back up a physical server to another physical or virtual server."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"It is a stable solution."
"One of the most valuable features was the usability, since many of the features were very straightforward. The backup and restoration process was also very fast. Although we weren't able to fully test the scenarios, one of the features was that we could have it restored on a remote site. However, since we were on-prem, we weren't able to test the remote site restoration."
"The solution offers good documentation."
"Being able to spin up a machine in a sandbox is amazing because it allows us to test things that we otherwise would not be able to do."
"The change in the way that Quorum processes data has made a tremendous improvement in backup and replication times. While the familiar interface remains, the underpinnings have been finely tuned and the speed is incredible. My large Exchange Server went from 5- to 6-hour backups down to 22 minutes."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"I have used the BMR (Bare Metal Restore) in several emergencies and it has absolutely saved my bacon."
 

Cons

"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 is quite surprising to me that the configuration cannot be backed up automatically, and I think that Rapid Recovery should have an option for scheduled configuration backup."
"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."
"Rapid Recovery can only backup the machine or disc, but it can't back up from folders, and files, and things like that."
"One area where Quest Rapid Recovery has room for improvement is in the handling of snapshots on Hyper-V."
"It's not really Quest's fault, but the only issue that I had during the time when I was doing a lot of our restores is whenever the server reboots, it has to bring all of the repositories back in again, which takes around five to six hours to pull eight terabytes back in again."
"I don't really think that there is a whole lot that needs to be changed. It would be nice if you could deploy the agent without having to reboot. When I upgraded my core to the latest version, I also wanted to update all of my servers, but I had to put that off because I can't just shoot it out there. I have to make sure it is at a time when I can do a reboot right away."
"Quorum OnQ's user interface is not very attractive and should be made more attractive."
"They have radio buttons that allow multiselection, which is not intuitive. Also, the URL for our environments is the same, making it confusing for management when handling different departments with different needs."
"I would really like it if they followed comparable products from other vendors and had an option where you could offload to tape. I know it sounds incredibly antiquated, but the benefit I see is that there would be a better air gap than you have with backing up to an online source."
"There was a situation I faced in the past when I contacted the tool's support team, and it took them a while to respond."
"They need integration with other platforms."
"At times the email notifications don't go out, but a quick reset always fixes that problem."
"It would be beneficial if file culling could be more granular."
"We found that some of the live SQL databases we were backing up would be inconsistent when we would restore them."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I don't think the licensing for the product is very expensive."
"The pricing is on the higher end."
"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 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."
"Its price is okay. It is reasonable in terms of the way it works."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The initial expenditure for us was a little under $40,000 for the recent renewal. For the first three years after that, other than electricity, there's no cost. After that, their support contract has to be renewed annually. We spent close to $6,000, between the two offices, for support."
"The upfront cost of purchasing a license for the hardware is quite steep."
"When we quote the price of Quorum to customers, they find it expensive."
"Quorum OnQ can be described as a medium-priced product...There are no ingress and egress charges in the product."
"The total for our current solution's licensing is about $14,000 for 12 servers for three years."
"I am not sure how much it costs, but I know it's expensive."
"When we first got the Quorum the licensing was different."
"We have never questioned whether it is worth it because it so obviously is a great value."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Real Estate/Law Firm
9%
Performing Arts
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Quorum OnQ?
It's a little expensive. That said, the cost aligns with other advocacy tools we have evaluated.
What needs improvement with Quorum OnQ?
They have radio buttons that allow multiselection, which is not intuitive. Also, the URL for our environments is the same, making it confusing for management when handling different departments wit...
 

Also Known As

Dell AppAssure
OnQ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

PRIME aerostructures GmbH, Tamworth Regional Council, Rhondda Housing Association, Stadtwerke Pforzheim GmbH & Co., Guangdong Aiyingdao Childrens Department Store, Nspyre, Tarrant Technology Partners, CloudRunner
LCL Bulk Transport
Find out what your peers are saying about Quest Rapid Recovery vs. Quorum OnQ and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.