Azure Site Recovery vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP comparison

The compared Microsoft and NetApp solutions aren't in the same category. Microsoft is ranked #3 in DRS , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 23.2% mindshare in the category. NetApp is ranked #1 in CSDS , with an average rating of 9.0, and holds a 28.6% mindshare. Additionally, 92% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Azure Site Recovery

Read 26 Azure Site Recovery reviews

889 Views
187 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Read 62 NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP reviews

417 Views
182 Comparison Views

95% willing to recommend

Azure Site Recovery

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Azure Site Recovery and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Commvault, Microsoft and others in Disaster Recovery as a Service.

To learn more, read our detailed Disaster Recovery as a Service Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery as a Service

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 860,592 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

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Disaster Recovery as a Service (3rd)

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Cloud Migration (1st), Cloud Storage (2nd), Cloud Backup (14th), Public Cloud Storage Services (7th), Cloud Software Defined Storage (1st)

Mindshare comparison

Azure Site Recovery and NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Azure Site Recovery is designed for Disaster Recovery as a Service and holds a mindshare of 23.2%, up 22.5% compared to last year.
NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, on the other hand, focuses on Cloud Software Defined Storage, holds 28.6% mindshare, up 28.4% since last year.

Disaster Recovery as a Service

Cloud Software Defined Storage

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

Pramod-Talekar

Sr Service Engineer at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Allows customers to manage SAN and NAS data within a single storage solution

The tool's most valuable features are the SnapLock and SnapMirror features. If something goes wrong with the data, we can restore it. This isn't a mirror; we store data in different locations. If there's an issue on the primary site, we can retrieve data from the secondary site. Multiprotocol support in NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is beneficial because it allows customers to manage SAN and NAS data within a single storage solution. This feature eliminates the need to purchase different types of storage.

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

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

"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."

"A major benefit is that you do not want to pay any more for huge costs to build a DR site."

"You can create automation to move workloads and redirect traffic to another region."

"They're moving a lot of their workload to cloud and aiming for a seamlessly integrated product."

"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."

"It is a very stable product and very scalable."

"Azure Site Recovery helps to save costs."

More Azure Site Recovery pros

"It makes sure we have control of the data and that we know what it's being used for. The main thing for us is that we need to know what applications are consuming it and responsible for it. The solution helps us do that."

"NetApp's Integration with AWS has helped us because we had a tough time transferring data when we used an ONTAP competitor as our storage partner. They don't have integration with AWS tools, so we had to figure it out on our own. ONTAP has built-in integration and allows us to replicate a copy to our second data center."

"ONTAP has been very stable for us, specifically in the cloud environment. It allows us to have high availability as well as standalone systems if that's what we want within our specific workloads. Also, on-premise has been a very stable environment. We have very few outages and when we do, we work with support to get systems back online in a timely manner."

"The most valuable feature is the ease of file storage."

"ONTAP's snapshot copies and thin clones in terms of operational recovery are pretty useful in recovering your data from a time in a snapshot. That's pretty useful for when you have an event where a disaster struck and then you need to recover all your data. It's pretty helpful and pretty fast in those terms."

"The storage tiering is definitely the most valuable feature... With respect to tiering, the inactive data is pushed to a lower tier where the storage cost is cheap, but the access cost is high."

"The solution’s Snapshot copies and thin clones in terms of operational recovery are the best thing since sliced bread. Rollback is super easy. It's just simple, and it works. It's very efficient."

"Unified Manager, System Manager, and Cloud Manager are all GUI-based. It's easy for somebody who has not been exposed to this for years to pick it up and work with it."

More NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP pros

Cons

"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."

"The tool should improve synchronization."

"Site Recovery's scalability could be improved."

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

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

"There is room for improvement in the release of patches, such as ensuring they are properly managed to avoid outages."

"Currently, Azure Site Recovery does not support shared disk options. Moreover, it does not support services like AppConfig or App Services."

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

More Azure Site Recovery cons

"I would like to see more information about Cloud Volumes ONTAP using Google Cloud Platform on NetApp's website."

"The support is good in general but the initial, front-line support could be improved. Because I have already been using the product for so long, when I call support I would rather talk to somebody who is a little bit more advanced or senior, rather than talking to the first-level support. Usually, it takes some time to reach out to their senior support."

"The DR has room for improvement. For example, we now have NetApp in Western Europe and we would like to back up the information to another region. It's impossible. We need to bring up an additional NetApp in that other region and create a Cloud Manager automation to copy the data... I would prefer it to be a more integrated solution like it was in the NetApp solution about a year ago. I would like to see something like AltaVault but in the cloud."

"The key feature, that we'd like to see in that is the ability to sync between regions within the AWS and Azure regions. We could use the cloud sync service, but we'd really like that native functionality within the cloud volume service."

"The integration wizard requires a bit of streamlining. There are small things that misconfigure or repeat the deployment that will create errors, specifically in Azure."

"The solution could be better when we're connecting to our S3 side of the house. Right now, it doesn't see it, and I'm not sure why."

"We've just been dealing with general pre-requisite infrastructure configuration challenges. Once those are out of the way, it is easy."

"How it handles erasure coding. I feel it the improvement should be there. Basically, it should be seamless. You don't want to have an underlying hardware issue or something, then suddenly there's no reads or writes. Luckily, it's at a replication site, so our main production site is still working and writing to it. But, the replication site has stopped right now while we try to bring that node back. Since we implemented in bare-metal, not in appliance, we had to go back to the original vendor. They didn't send it in time, and we had a hardware memory issue. Then, we had a hard disk issue, which brought the node down physically."

More NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 affordable."

"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."

"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's licensing is yearly and not expensive."

"They have a license to pay."

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

"They have a very good price which keeps our customers happy."

"Our licensing is based on a yearly subscription. That is an additional cost, but because of the storage efficiencies that the NetApp gives, even with the additional cost of the NetApp license, you still end up saving money versus straight Azure native for storage. It's definitely worth it."

"It is expensive. There are no costs in addition to their standard licensing fees."

"Compared to other storage vendors, NetApp, is not always able to compete with their pricing. Yet, we acknowledge the ease of use ONTAP brings with the AWS integration."

"Some flexibility around the licensing model would help. The product is licensed based on capacity. Basically, the largest capacity license that you can buy is 368 terabytes. At this point, NetApp is addressing some people's concerns around this."

"The pricing could be improved. It is a good product, but it is very expensive for me."

"Cost is a big factor, because a lot of companies can't afford enterprise grade equipment all the time. They skimp where they can. I would recommend that they improve the cost."

"The AWS consumer-based pricing model makes it easy for developers to use their credit cards to spin up virtual servers immediately."

More NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP pricing and cost advice

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

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Educational Organization

28%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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?

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP?

So a lot of these licenses are at the rate that is required for capacity. So they're they're able to reduce the license consumption and also the consumption of the underlying cloud storage.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP?

The solution's pricing is reasonable.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP?

NetApp's support could improve.

See all answers

Comparisons

HPE Zerto Software vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 18% of the time

VMware Live Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 16% of the time

AWS Elastic Disaster Recovery vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 15% of the time

Veeam Data Platform vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 15% of the time

Datto Cloud Continuity vs Azure Site Recovery

Compared 2% of the time

More Azure Site Recovery Competitors

Azure NetApp Files vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Compared 18% of the time

Amazon S3 vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Compared 12% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Compared 10% of the time

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Compared 9% of the time

Portworx Enterprise vs NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

Compared 6% of the time

More NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Site Recovery

June 2025

Download Azure Site Recovery product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP

June 2025

Download NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP product report

Also Known As

No data available

ONTAP Cloud, CVO, NetApp CVO

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

NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP is an efficient storage management solution for managing and storing data in the cloud. It offers seamless integration with cloud providers, advanced data replication capabilities, and high data protection. With reliable performance, it is ideal for industries like healthcare and finance.

NetApp

Sample Customers

Russell Reynolds Associates, Union Insurance, Rackspace

1. Accenture 2. Acer 3. Adidas 4. Aetna 5. AIG 6. Apple 7. Bank of America 8. Barclays 9. Bayer 10. Berkshire Hathaway 11. BNP Paribas 12. Cisco 13. Coca-Cola 14. Comcast 15.ConocoPhillips 16. CVS Health 17. Dell 18. Deutsche Bank 19. eBay 20. Eli Lilly 21. FedEx 22. Ford 23. Freescale Semiconductor 24. General Electric 25. Google 26. Honeywell 27. IBM 28. Intel 29. Intuit 30. JPMorgan Chase 31. Kellogg's 32. KeyCorp 33. Liberty Mutual 34. L'Oréal 35. Mastercard

Buyer's Guide

Disaster Recovery as a Service

June 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about VMware, Commvault, Microsoft and others in Disaster Recovery as a Service. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.