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

Quorum OnQ vs Veritas CloudPoint 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

Quorum OnQ
Ranking in Cloud Backup
35th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (41st), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (24th)
Veritas CloudPoint
Ranking in Cloud Backup
24th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Cloud Backup category, the mindshare of Quorum OnQ is 0.9%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veritas CloudPoint is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Backup Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Veritas CloudPoint0.5%
Quorum OnQ0.9%
Other98.6%
Cloud Backup
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2594778 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Application Analyst at a non-profit with 5,001-10,000 employees
Enhanced filtering for advocate emails
Quorum provides an elevated ability to filter on everything from people's location to age to their voting history. This is an extreme feature that will help our advocacy department a lot. It encompasses the ability to formulate emails and calls to action across regions. Their platform is more advanced than our previous one. It provides a smooth training experience and easy terminology for those in the advocacy world.
SL
Operations Director, Information Technology at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Seamless integration supports small teams with existing skills
The most valuable feature we've found with Veritas CloudPoint so far is the lack of a learning curve because the team was already familiar with all of the consoles and how to build policies. As they started to use it in Azure, they were able to continue doing things as they were used to doing them rather than having to learn a new tool. The efficiency gain we've experienced is that we were able to start deploying backup policies to Azure without having to learn a new tool, even though there are arguments about overhead and granularity if one uses native Azure backup tools compared to Veritas CloudPoint.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a stable solution."
"The solution is very cost effective."
"It does automated tests to the systems to make sure that you could spin them up if you needed to. And if something doesn't come back up in those tests, we get a notification saying the system didn't come back up."
"Quorum OnQ has a good ransomware protection feature, and customer service and support were very good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"The most valuable feature of Quorum OnQ is quick recovery."
"I like this product because it is easy to use."
"I have used the BMR (Bare Metal Restore) in several emergencies and it has absolutely saved my bacon."
"The product is good for volume-level backups."
"The most valuable features are the indexing, the file-level restore, and the replications between regions."
"I would rate Veritas CloudPoint a ten because it's done everything it says it'll do, and we've really not had many problems with it."
 

Cons

"We found that some of the live SQL databases we were backing up would be inconsistent when we would restore them."
"They have radio buttons that allow multiselection, which is not intuitive."
"I don't love the scheduler, as I think that interface could use an overhaul."
"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."
"Quorum OnQ can be improved by providing support for other operating systems like Ubuntu."
"At times the email notifications don't go out, but a quick reset always fixes that problem."
"The one thing they could do is some tweaking on the web solution that's supposed to monitor everything from one page, rather than having to bring each server up on its own webpage. It doesn't always accurately show what the system's state is at the time, and we have to restart that process now and then."
"One thing that could be done to improve it would be a single pane of glass for doing disaster recovery testing, where I could have remote consoles in one place... I still have to go to each location in a browser and then bring up the console. I'd like to see them integrate that into a single pane of glass so I don't have to go to each server."
"The product needs to improve its file-level or granular-level backups."
"They are niche with the work that they do, but they should have more integration with NetBackup and the reporting is something they should be working towards improving."
"I don't care for the pricing or capacity license model from Veritas CloudPoint because there are cases where we back up the same data multiple times, yet we still owe from a capacity standpoint based on how much data is managed in our backups."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When we quote the price of Quorum to customers, they find it expensive."
"I am not sure how much it costs, but I know it's expensive."
"The cost is higher than other software and services, but it is an absolute must-have."
"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."
"When we first got the Quorum the licensing was different."
"The upfront cost of purchasing a license for the hardware is quite steep."
"The solution’s pricing is economical."
"Quorum OnQ can be described as a medium-priced product...There are no ingress and egress charges in the product."
"When comparing to other solutions, the price is at par."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Backup solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
11%
Performing Arts
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Large Enterprise4
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What needs improvement with Veritas CloudPoint?
I don't care for the pricing or capacity license model from Veritas CloudPoint because there are cases where we back up the same data multiple times, yet we still owe from a capacity standpoint bas...
What is your primary use case for Veritas CloudPoint?
Our use case for Veritas CloudPoint is that it was implemented so our on-premises staff could continue to have the same look and feel as they started to back up virtual machines that were being bui...
What advice do you have for others considering Veritas CloudPoint?
We work in a cloud environment in the health insurance industry as a medium-sized business. We're pretty happy with Veritas CloudPoint in terms of how we've used it on-premises over the years. Alth...
 

Also Known As

OnQ
CloudPoint
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

LCL Bulk Transport
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Quorum OnQ vs. Veritas CloudPoint and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.