No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs NetApp V-Series [EOL] 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

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Backup and Recovery (9th), Cloud Backup (10th), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (9th)
NetApp V-Series [EOL]
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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.
it_user487899 - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Administrator at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Flexible, allowing us to provide NAS and SAN solutions with the same hardware
According to my experience, for certain HPC environments, we encounter certain Memory/CPU limitations when we have a large number of IOPS. This is why, in order to support such loads, several cabs are required in parallel, complicating the configuration and administration. Another handicap is the management of the LACP that, when we are talking about environments with less than 20 calculation nodes, may not balance correctly despite setting the RR option.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery has positively impacted my organization by securing and stabilizing our platform."
"Technical support has been very good. They usually respond quickly to our requests.​"
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward, it's not complex."
"It provides our disaster recovery solution. It works fine in our tests.​"
"I appreciate the automated orchestration of recovery processes in this solution, especially integration with Route 53 and automatically using Route 53 to switch to a different region directly."
"For regular backup and restore solutions, this product is fine."
"The solution's cost is reasonable."
"The solution is dependent on the network bandwidth. For example, if they have a bandwidth of 10Mbps the solution will run a little heavier. If the bandwidth is good the solution runs well."
"We are very happy with this solution as it brings us the scalability and stability of Data Ontap and the versatility of NetApp solutions in order to provide different types of services for our customers' requirements (NAS, CIFS, FC / FCoE)."
"You have the ability to connect a third-party storage back end, EMC VMAX in our case, and have all NetApp functionalities available."
 

Cons

"The only thing I would like to see is, they don't have a formal ticketing system. There is no way I can go back and see what questions we had six months back, what issues we had, and how they were resolved."
"Because the replication is continuous and block-level, if a production server is hit by ransomware, the encrypted garbage data is often replicated to the DR site in near-real time."
"The initial setup was complex rather than straightforward. It became more complex in several ways."
"I have not seen any areas that need improvement at this time."
"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is charging clients $20 to do the DR backups. It is an expensive solution."
"The user interface, customer support, and the recovery time for the current customer query could use improvement."
"Since I have to view everything on the console, the previous application solutions like IBM and Sanavi showed the RPO and RTO status directly. In AWS Disaster Recovery Service, these details are not available, making it difficult to check my replication status."
"I set up a test, deleted the source, and went to fail it back, and it didn't work."
"According to my experience, for certain HPC environments, we encounter certain Memory/CPU limitations when we have a large number of IOPS."
"We have had some performance issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CloudEndure Disaster Recovery is charging clients $20 to do the DR backups. It is an expensive solution."
"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."
"I rate the price of CloudEndure Disaster Recovery a six out of ten."
"Where the price adds up, there are CloudEndure licenses, then there is the AWS environment, and finally, there is the AWS storage, so cumulatively, it adds up."
"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."
"It has saved us money from having to buy hardware for disaster recovery."
"We were happy with the pricing that they gave us."
"I feel the product's pricing is a good value. Licensing is pretty straightforward."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that pricing is fair, and you pay for the use.
What needs improvement with CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
I believe AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery can be improved by providing more features, such as an automated or AI-based solution that detects issues before they happen, which is a feature I would want...
What is your primary use case for CloudEndure Disaster Recovery?
My main use case for AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery is to minimize downtime and data loss with fast recovery of our on-premises and cloud-based applications using storage, minimum compute, and point...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

CloudEndure Disaster Recovery
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Agio, Cloud Nation, Limelight Networks
City of Houston, Health Choice Network, SVC Bank, Plex Systems, Larsen & Toubro, IWD, JCVI
Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Rubrik and others in Backup and Recovery. Updated: May 2026.
893,438 professionals have used our research since 2012.