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
15th
Average Rating
5.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Backup (51st)
Azure Site Recovery
Ranking in Disaster Recovery as a Service
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Disaster Recovery as a Service category, the mindshare of Arcserve Cloud Direct is 0.9%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Azure Site Recovery is 23.9%, up from 24.1% 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."
"What I love about Azure Site Recovery is its simplicity for basic configurations."
"The solution is secure, reliable, and scalable."
"The setup is quite easy, just requiring the creation of a vault."
"Our primary use case is for disaster recovery and business continuity and disaster recovery (BCDR)."
"We use the tool for business continuity purposes."
"Azure Site Recovery is obviously a time-saving solution, and I can write PowerShell scripts to automate failover on or off processes."
"Provides generally good performance, from protection to production to failover to data recovery."
"You can create automation to move workloads and redirect traffic to another region."
 

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."
"It is for site-to-site replication. When something goes wrong on your site, you only get 15 minutes before it also goes wrong on your replicated site. There should be some way to be able to say that we want to restore it, but we want to restore it to the version from yesterday. It should support versioning. I would also like to see real-time scanning for advanced threat protection, more straightforward billing, and quicker turnaround on the tech support."
"When it runs, it runs well but when it doesn't run, the solution needs to make it clearer as to why and what the troubleshooting process is. All this would be possible if the error logging was streamlined a bit."
"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."
"The tool should improve synchronization."
"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Site Recovery's scalability could be improved."
"The primary area for improvement in Azure Site Recovery is its pricing."
"There is room for improvement in the release of patches, such as ensuring they are properly managed to avoid outages."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I'm not sure about the Azure Site Recovery pricing, but my organization gets monthly bills from providers."
"Azure Site Recovery is affordable."
"Azure Site Recovery is neither very expensive nor very cheap."
"They have a license to pay."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery as a Service solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

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?
To be honest, I didn't use it directly. As far as I know, there weren't any significant problems with Azure Site Recovery. Although pricing for data solutions can always be cheaper, site recovery w...
 

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, Microsoft, Commvault and others in Disaster Recovery as a Service. Updated: May 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.