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

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Bacula Enterprise 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

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
20th
Ranking in Cloud Backup
12th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (11th)
Bacula Enterprise
Ranking in Backup and Recovery
24th
Ranking in Cloud Backup
16th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is 0.8%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Bacula Enterprise is 1.1%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Backup and Recovery Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery0.8%
Bacula Enterprise1.1%
Other98.1%
Backup and Recovery
 

Featured Reviews

KS
Data Engineer at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Continuous replication has protected critical servers and supports seamless disaster recovery drills
Some features that I personally feel can be improved are more simplified monitoring and reporting. As I previously mentioned, the console shows the replication status. If it had more detailed dashboards or built-in reports for DR readiness, it would make it easier for the teams to track everything in one place. Another improvement would be cost visibility and optimization guidance in optimizing the cost and also giving us visibility of it. Because the staging resources and replication storage are running continuously, it would be very helpful for organizations and users if AWS provided clearer cost insights, recommendations, and remediations to optimize the DR environment. It would also be useful if AWS added more automation options for application-level recovery, such as easier ways to handle IP changes, domain name system (DNS) updates, or application dependencies during failover. Additionally, we can simplify the setup and configuration process. For someone new to the service, understanding the staging settings, launch templates, and networking configurations can take some time. Setup simplicity and more detailed monitoring and alerting features would be beneficial. If we could add that, we can easily track the replication health, lag, and potential issues. Instead of relying on other additional tools for monitoring and alerting features, we can rely on AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery itself.
Davilson  Aguiar - PeerSpot reviewer
Analista Tecnologia Banco de Dados at Centro de Gestão da Tecnologia da Informação
Very cost-effective and well organized with good compression
It could improve its interface or offer a specific screen for the manager of the company. A managerial user who wants more information beyond the operational technician should be able to access it. It could include greater transparency regarding the volume of data trafficked on the network, as well as the expectation of deduplication. A more practical strategy could come with a backup policy model as a suggestion for both large and small companies. A simple suggestion is to visually implement the backup time as far as your physical media.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Scalability is pretty good; it's seamless and can do it automatically."
"The most valuable aspect of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is its instant block replication feature. This allows us to perform live block verification and eliminates the need to concern ourselves with recovery point objectives. This capability is particularly advantageous for critical workloads."
"Technical support has been very good; they usually respond quickly to our requests."
"It's on the cheaper side and not too expensive for users."
"The strong points are the stability and scalability of the solution, as well as the convenience of it being cloud-based."
"Customer service is quite helpful."
"​The initial setup is really straightforward."
"For regular backup and restore solutions, this product is fine."
"It is easy to scale Bacula Enterprise even if your system is growing tremendously in data and servers."
"It brought many advantages - such as the learning curve being very light."
"The most valuable feature is the support for Linux servers."
"It can be used in virtually any environment we have onsite."
"Bacula is very solid, very stable, and very scalable."
"Bacula is pretty stable."
"The most valuable features are the special plugins such as SAP HANA databases, Microsoft SQL, and various types of virtualization."
"The solution has extensive documentation and a very active community."
 

Cons

"Definitely there should be better logging. From a customer perspective I would like to see more logs on what is happening."
"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."
"The cost of AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is seen as expensive."
"Sometimes, one of the servers will get behind for one reason or another, and it does not notify us when that happens."
"An improved AWS pricing model is needed."
"The solution's network setup and a lot of the control tower setup could be improved."
"In its current state, ECL integrates with CloudWatch for basic logging and monitoring, yet improvements could include more detailed logs for specific actions, like when I perform actions such as push or pull."
"The failback could be improved. It should be more intuitive."
"A more user-friendly interface (GUI) can be developed."
"Many features have been converted to commercial licensing, which restricts their availability."
"Bacula needs a graphical user interface because, for administrators, the command-line interface is okay, but for the average user it is not very easy."
"The interface needs to be easier for adding new devices to be managed."
"The initial setup could be a bit easier."
"Bacula needs a graphical user interface because, for administrators, the command-line interface is okay, but for the average user it is not very easy."
"We would like to see an improvement in the functionality of the GUI."
"We are looking for a unique interface that can rule both enterprise and open source editions. Such a thing does not yet exist."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It has saved us money from having to buy hardware for disaster recovery."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is charging clients $20 to do the DR backups. It is an expensive solution."
"We were happy with the pricing that they gave us."
"I rate the price of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery a six out of ten."
"The pricing is better now that they had come out with the Tier 2 which replicates a little less often. In comparison to what I would have been spending with any other type of solution, the pricing is fair."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
"They license us on a per machine basis. We have a set number of machines, which we have licensed.​"
"I feel the product's pricing is a good value. Licensing is pretty straightforward."
"We have a perpetual license."
"This is an open-source solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
11%
University
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise11
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
The pricing has been fine, and regarding the setup cost as well, it is quite fine. There is definitely a scope of improvement, and for year-end licensing, they should definitely improve the cost.
What needs improvement with CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
After implementing AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery, we significantly improved our disaster recovery metrics. Our RPO improved from approximately three to four hours to less than one minute. While the...
What is your primary use case for CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
Our main use case for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery was to ensure that if our primary on-premises data center failed, we could quickly launch EC2 instances in AWS to resume production. The main use...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Bacula Enterprise?
Bacula is more expensive than various other solutions. It’s almost completely commercial now. Products like Veeam software are much more expensive.
What needs improvement with Bacula Enterprise?
Many features have been converted to commercial licensing, which restricts their availability.
What is your primary use case for Bacula Enterprise?
The last scenario in which I used Bacula was for a customer who needed some open-source tool which could support encryption at that time. We managed to convince the customer to use Bacula to deploy...
 

Also Known As

CloudEndure Disaster Recovery
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agio, Cloud Nation, Limelight Networks
NASA, SwissCom, Navisite, Turner Studios, Bank Austria, Caixa Bank, SdV Plurimedia, Leibniz University Hannover, Zeta Global, Tricore, NetLog, Siemens, LocaWeb, wbsGo, itesys, Queens School of Computing, Escrypt.
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs. Bacula Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.