Azure Site Recovery vs IBM Disaster Recovery Services comparison

Microsoft and IBM are both solutions in the Disaster Recovery as a Service category. Microsoft is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1, while IBM is ranked #5 with an average rating of 10.0. Microsoft holds a 23.9% mindshare in DRS, compared to IBM’s 1.9% mindshare. Additionally, 92% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of IBM users who would recommend it.

Azure Site Recovery

Read 24 Azure Site Recovery reviews

1,009 Views
755 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

IBM Disaster Recovery Services

Read 3 IBM Disaster Recovery Services reviews

118 Views
78 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Azure Site Recovery

IBM Disaster Recovery Services

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 14, 2024

IBM Disaster Recovery Services and Azure Site Recovery compete in the disaster recovery category. Azure Site Recovery seems to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive features and integration capabilities, outweighing potential pricing concerns.

Features: IBM Disaster Recovery Services offers high availability, managed services, and strong server and data protection. Azure Site Recovery provides automatic replication, monitoring, and seamless integration with Microsoft tools, emphasizing automated processes and easy compatibility as key strengths.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Azure Site Recovery enables smooth cloud integration with intuitive deployment models and extensive documentation. Its customer service, while sometimes facing delays, offers efficient online resources. IBM Disaster Recovery Services presents a more hands-on approach with tailored service options, leading to longer deployment times but more personalized support.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Disaster Recovery Services generally has lower setup costs with an attractive ROI for large-scale deployments due to tailored solutions. Azure Site Recovery's setup costs are higher but provide increased ROI over time through scalable solutions and automated processes, delivering extended value in the long term.

To learn more, read our detailed Azure Site Recovery vs. IBM Disaster Recovery Services Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Azure Site Recovery vs. IBM Disaster Recovery Services

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 851,604 peers since 2012

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

Azure Site Recovery

Ranking in Disaster Recovery as a Service

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

IBM Disaster Recovery Services

Ranking in Disaster Recovery as a Service

5th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

8.4

Number of Reviews

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 Azure Site Recovery is 23.9%, up from 24.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Disaster Recovery Services is 1.9%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Disaster Recovery as a Service

Featured Reviews

RituparnaBhattacharya

Senior Infrastructure Engineer at MIC Global

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.

Read full review

Şefik Mert Polatay

General manager at Atlas Consulting Bilisim Hizmetleri Ltd.

Ease of use, performance, availability, and scalability

The initial setup is very easy, user-friendly, and not complex. It mostly comes with all installed, an operating system, database, and security, all included in Power Systems. So users can easily install, configure, and use it. It's integrated with other systems. You can run different systems from IBM Power Systems, AIX Linux, or IBM I operating system. It's also integrated into Windows systems and other databases and servers.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"What I love about Azure Site Recovery is its simplicity for basic configurations."

"Azure Site Recovery is obviously a time-saving solution, and I can write PowerShell scripts to automate failover on or off processes."

"Site Recovery's most valuable features include its user-friendly console and the ease of migration."

"The solution is secure, reliable, and scalable."

"We use the tool for business continuity purposes."

"The solution is very easy to use."

"Azure Site Recovery is an easy-to-use and fairly stable solution for disaster recovery."

"The setup is quite easy, just requiring the creation of a vault."

More Azure Site Recovery pros

"Disaster Recovery Services is stable."

"The initial setup is very easy and user-friendly."

"The solution works well for very large organizations. It can scale quite well."

Cons

"The product's performance is an area of concern where improvements are required."

"Site Recovery's scalability could be improved."

"We need to be able to move the virtual servers and not build and then port them across. They need to improve the hypervisor."

"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."

"I would like to see more security features."

"The solution needs to improve replication and failover processes. We are still looking for improvements in the cost baseline."

"In the newest version of Azure Site Recovery, the configuration was a little more complex, so this is an area for improvement."

"Azure Site Recovery's deployment is complex. There are a lot of bugs, and it needs to improve stability."

More Azure Site Recovery cons

"The infrastructure level of IBM's recovery systems could be improved."

"Stability could always be better."

"Disaster Recovery Services could provide better value for money."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"I'm not sure about the Azure Site Recovery pricing, but my organization gets monthly bills from providers."

"They have a license to pay."

"Azure Site Recovery is a very reasonably priced product."

"Azure Site Recovery is neither very expensive nor very cheap."

"Azure Site Recovery is affordable."

"The pricing of the solution is based on the scale of the project or business. It's based on the server amount and the amount of data being stored. For our client, based on the amount of data they have, it may be around $20,000 USD. It could get much more expensive on the customer side."

"Disaster Recovery Services is expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery as a Service solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Disaster Recovery Services?

The pricing is perfect. It's not expensive because it's all-inclusive. The operating system, database, security, different file systems. So, overall, it's cheaper than Oracle or UNIX systems with O...

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Disaster Recovery Services?

Nothing, it’s almost perfect.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for IBM Disaster Recovery Services?

The use case is for high availability and disaster recovery.

See all answers

Comparisons

Zerto vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 18% of the time

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 18% of the time

VMware Live Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 16% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 16% of the time

Rubrik vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 8% of the time

More Azure Site Recovery Competitors

Precisely Assure MIMIX vs IBM Disaster Recovery Services

Compared 100% of the time

More IBM Disaster Recovery Services Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Site Recovery

May 2025

Download Azure Site Recovery product report

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery as a Service

May 2025

Download IBM Disaster Recovery Services product report

Overview

Help your business to keep doing business - even during major IT outages. Azure Site Recovery offers ease of deployment, cost effectiveness, and dependability. Deploy replication, failover, and recovery processes through Site Recovery to help keep your applications running during planned and unplanned outages. Site Recovery is a native disaster recovery as a service (DRaaS), and Microsoft been recognized as a leader in DRaaS based on completeness of vision and ability to execute by Gartner in the 2018 Magic Quadrant for Disaster Recovery as a Service.

Microsoft

IBM Resiliency Disaster Recovery as a Service (DRaaS) can provide end-to-end integrated services using private, public and/or hybrid cloud. IBM Disaster Recovery as a Service (DRaaS) provides continuous replication of critical applications, infrastructure, data and systems to the cloud so users can recover within minutes of an IT outage. Intelligent Orchestration offers a unified DR management approach that delivers real-time readiness validation.

IBM

Sample Customers

Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace

i-Virtualize, QD, Continuum Managed Services LLC, Royal Arctic Line, Department of Science and Technology of the Republic of the Philippines, Idwala Industrial Holdings Limited, A-Plant c.a.r.u.s. Information Technology GmbH Hannover, eASPNet Taiwan Inc., Mobile Mini Inc., TriDatum Solutions Inc., M7 Managed Services Ltd., Hospital de la Concepci‹n

Buyer's Guide

Azure Site Recovery vs. IBM Disaster Recovery Services

April 2025

Free Report: Azure Site Recovery vs. IBM Disaster Recovery Services

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Site Recovery vs. IBM Disaster Recovery Services and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Azure Site Recovery vs. IBM Disaster Recovery Services report.

See our list of best Disaster Recovery as a Service vendors.

We monitor all Disaster Recovery as a Service reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.