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

Arcserve Cloud Direct vs Azure Site Recovery comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Arcserve Cloud Direct
Ranking in Disaster Recovery as a Service
17th
Average Rating
5.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Backup (54th)
Azure Site Recovery
Ranking in Disaster Recovery as a Service
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Disaster Recovery as a Service category, the mindshare of Arcserve Cloud Direct is 1.0%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Azure Site Recovery is 23.2%, up from 22.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Disaster Recovery as a Service
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1321896 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good backup retention but it is not a reliable platform and it doesn't giving any sort of alerts that things are not working
StorageCraft wasn't getting full backup coverage. It was backing up around 1 to 2% of the points. It was not a reliable platform and it wasn't giving any sort of alerts that things were not working. The majority of stuff wasn't backed up, so we really weren't happy with them. That's when we went on the look for a new solution.
RituparnaBhattacharya - PeerSpot reviewer
The time-saving aspects allow us to write PowerShell scripts to automate failover processes
First of all, we initially faced a challenge as Azure Site Recovery was not supporting shared disk options on SQL clusters with VMs, which are important for a Windows cluster mode. Additionally, the setup is quite easy, only requiring the creation of a vault. Its time-saving aspects allow us to write PowerShell scripts to automate failover processes.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The backup retention was pretty good. Being able to archive users who had been backed up, is a good functionality. Even if they've been deactivated it'll keep the backups and keep them protected."
"The documentation is good, and it can be integrated with other products."
"Azure Site Recovery's automated file synchronization was a game-changer in managing legacy systems."
"The solution is secure, reliable, and scalable."
"Azure Site Recovery is obviously a time-saving solution, and I can write PowerShell scripts to automate failover on or off processes."
"Despite the cost concerns and downtime management, I would still recommend Azure Site Recovery."
"Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."
"It’s native to Azure and does exactly what it’s designed to do—recover one site to another without creating all the VMs on that site. This helps reduce costs on the secondary site."
"The features I find most valuable in Azure Site Recovery include the test failover, which allows us to test our site recovery without bringing down the primary; disaster recovery provides that feature."
 

Cons

"StorageCraft wasn't getting full backup coverage. It was backing up around one to 2% of the points. It was not a reliable platform and it wasn't giving any sort of alerts that things were not working."
"The support team took a lot of time to respond and was not very professional."
"It would be good if we could replicate the solution to multiple locations simultaneously because we are currently allowed to replicate to just a single location."
"There is room for improvement in the release of patches, such as ensuring they are properly managed to avoid outages."
"It could include more of a backup and recovery."
"The system did go down a couple of times, which impacted our operations. For stability, I would rate it a seven out of ten."
"The solution needs to improve replication and failover processes. We are still looking for improvements in the cost baseline."
"Recently, I worked with a mass issue related to Recovery Services Vault, and the VM support engineers are taking a lot of time to extend support to the customer."
"I conveyed the feedback to the agent, suggesting an increase in the agent count in our VNS in the USA. I also addressed notification concerns, as some issues didn't trigger alerts during a recent call."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It should have more straightforward billing. The billing was what got funky. It was really cheap. We would pay based on the usage. We paid around $225 a month for site-to-site replication."
"Azure Site Recovery is neither very expensive nor very cheap."
"I'm not sure about the Azure Site Recovery pricing, but my organization gets monthly bills from providers."
"Azure Site Recovery is a very reasonably priced product."
"The tool is expensive. What is expensive to me might not be expensive to you. As I mentioned, we seek ways to reduce our costs. If the price goes down, that would be great. I rate the tool's pricing a six out of ten."
"The tool's licensing is yearly and not expensive."
"They have a license to pay."
"Azure Site Recovery is affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Azure Site Recovery?
Azure Site Recovery allows my company to save around 30 percent of the time on every VM that we need to back up and restore.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Site Recovery?
The price of Azure Site Recovery was reasonable compared to other data costs. It was not the expensive part of our costs, but, as always, there is room to make it cheaper.
What needs improvement with Azure Site Recovery?
The flexibility of Azure Site Recovery regarding integration with different IT environments is limited; it is purely an Azure platform service for business continuity, not meant for integration wit...
 

Also Known As

StorageCraft Cloud Services, StorageCraft Disaster Recovery Services, StorageCraft Cloud Backup, Arcserve Cloud Services, Zetta Cloud Backup
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lion
Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace
Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Commvault, Microsoft and others in Disaster Recovery as a Service. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.