Hitachi Content Platform vs IBM Cloud Object Storage comparison

Hitachi Vantara and IBM are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. Hitachi Vantara is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.0, while IBM is ranked #12 with an average rating of 9.3. Hitachi Vantara holds a 1.5% mindshare in FaOS, compared to IBM’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Hitachi Vantara users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of IBM users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

IBM Cloud Object Storage and Hitachi Content Platform are key players in the cloud storage market, each appealing to different organizational needs. IBM has an edge with competitive pricing and broad integration capabilities, while Hitachi offers advanced data management suitable for enterprises with specific data requirements.

Features: IBM Cloud Object Storage offers scalability, flexible storage classes, and seamless integration with IBM cloud services, which is beneficial for businesses using multiple IBM products. On the other hand, Hitachi Content Platform provides comprehensive data management capabilities, multi-cloud support, and sophisticated data retention policies, catering to enterprises needing advanced solutions.

Room for Improvement: IBM Cloud Object Storage could enhance its interface for non-tech users, offer more granular data analytics, and expand third-party integrations. Hitachi Content Platform may improve its deployment simplicity, reduce the complexity of its pricing models, and increase documentation clarity for new users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM Cloud Object Storage stands out for its straightforward deployment and accessible support, simplifying the implementation process for customers. Hitachi Content Platform might have a more complex deployment process but compensates with strong customer service and detailed documentation, suiting companies requiring specialized support.

Pricing and ROI: IBM Cloud Object Storage is known for its cost-effective pricing that offers high ROI for businesses with diverse storage needs. In contrast, Hitachi Content Platform, despite its higher initial costs, provides a solid ROI for enterprises focusing on extensive data governance and protection, making it a valuable investment for targeted use cases.

To learn more, read our detailed Hitachi Content Platform vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Hitachi Content Platform vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 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

Pure Storage FlashBlade

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.5%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Hitachi Content Platform is 1.5%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Cloud Object Storage is 1.2%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Pure Storage FlashBlade	5.5%
IBM Cloud Object Storage	1.2%
Hitachi Content Platform	1.5%
Other	91.8%

File and Object Storage

Featured Reviews

MikaelHellström

IT Manager at Regin Dalarna

Has handled backup storage needs reliably and supports seamless upgrades

In environments requiring high throughput and low latency, Pure Storage FlashBlade provides high throughput and normal latency, but we do not have any application that requires low latency right now, so the latency of three to five milliseconds is considered kind of high. Pure Storage FlashBlade's ability to integrate with enterprise applications is not important for us, as we only want to present an S3 bucket for our backup, which we have done, and it works very fast. We use the Purity software's data reduction techniques; we have a backup software that compresses everything before sending it to the S3 bucket, achieving a data reduction of 1.1 to one. I would recommend Pure Storage FlashBlade to other companies because it's a very fast and scalable solution for anyone who needs it. On a scale of 1-10, I rate this solution an 8.

Read full review

Mir Gulzar Ahmed

IT Manager at Synergy Computers

Integrates well with existing systems but technical support for the platform needs improvement

While deployment is simple, it's not as simple as StorageGRID. The architecture is entirely different, even though the end product uses the same protocols. The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. Deployment isn't as centralized either. Although I've deployed Hitachi Content myself in our production head office for the VM team, even though it's simple, it wasn't completely straightforward. They still required my help with the initial configuration environment setup. So, it's not just simple; there are some tricky aspects. The environment is tricky, but if you understand it, configuration can be done quickly.

Read full review

reviewer2384904

Account Technology Specialist at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Enables seamless data replication and supports comprehensive data analytics workflows

The capability to replicate data in different locations is valuable since it enables customers to have a cluster over various sites. Also, important is the capability to provide RESTful APIs for custom connectors. In terms of security, I advise customers to rotate access keys to enhance protection. Additionally, scalability is effortless as you can add nodes or expand the license.

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 snapshots, replication, and the ability to have immutable blades are the most valuable features. You're putting data snapshots out in those blades, and they cannot be touched. Its performance is great."

"The onboarding and integrated monitoring tools are pretty good."

"We have integrated it with VMware. The integration process is pretty good. Especially with VMware, it helps with the capacity of it."

"The tool's most valuable features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."

"The initial setup is pretty easy and simple."

"I would rate this solution an eight plus. It has has good flexibility and stability, it's easy to manage and the response time is good."

"The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power outages when we need to quickly move data between different data centers. It ensures efficient replication and helps maintain our data centers' uptime."

"The performance of FlashBlade is excellent. It does not necessarily leverage the SOS API that some of the newer products leverage, but I found its speed pretty much on par and comparable. It is fast, and it does what it is supposed to do."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The most valuable features of the solution are the versioning and the ransomware protection."

"Companies can scale the solution."

"One of the most hidden valuable features is ensuring that you don't have bit rot, so it will go and check every single object that's stored on the system, then ensure that if there's a problem, it'll be repaired from either a local copy or remote copy, depending upon your configuration."

"Integrating Hitachi Content Platform with existing systems is not challenging."

"The product provides the fastest technology."

"The Hitachi Content Platform is a stable and reliable solution."

"Feature-wise, it has a lot of features. The most valuable features include de-duplication, encryption, version controlling, support, and tamper-proof data."

"Hitachi is a big company, so it's a very strong product."

Cons

"The solution is expensive."

"I would like to see more VM-Aware features in the next release of this solution."

"The speed could be improved."

"On our dedupe during our initial buy, we were expecting a number a little higher like 4x. However, we are getting about 3.6. While it is close enough, it doesn't quite hit the numbers. So, this has been a challenge."

"Recently, while upgrading the version code, one of the controllers failed. Replacing the controller took between 14 to 20 days."

"I have not seen ROI."

"In terms of scalability, it doesn't expand out quite as robustly as some of the others, but it covers 90% of the market in what it does."

"I would also like to see better support for CIFS workloads."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"The solution could use more integration with clouds."

"Two things that can be improved are pricing and configuration. Mostly the pricing is an issue. And if I were to add anything, I would say more integration with backup solutions such as Veeam Backup."

"Although they claim to provide NFS, the actual implementation requires an additional gateway, which makes it a costly solution."

"The user interface isn't as user-friendly, and the management platform UI isn't as intuitive as others. So it can be more user-friendly."

"The only thing is that it should be more cost effective."

"This product's ability to track logs for access still needs to be improved."

"What is lacking in this solution is a simple process to migrate from existing systems."

"There is room for improvement in the capacity for integration with other platforms."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is very expensive."

"In my opinion, we have paid the right price for the product. I don't think that it is too much or too little."

"Our licensing is renewed annually."

"The pricing for FlashBlade is between cheap and moderate."

"It's a costly solution, but Pure Storage FlashBlade doesn't require additional licenses. All of the software is combined into one bundle."

"I rate the tool's pricing a seven to eight out of ten."

"Pure Storage FlashBlade is a hardware appliance, and it's very expensive if you compare its price with other solutions. You can get the same features and benefits from its competitor, VAST Data, but for half the price of Pure Storage FlashBlade."

"We used a reseller for the purchase."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"I think the ROI for this solution is very good because the pricing for it is in between other solutions."

"Overall, it's costly."

"The product’s cost is average."

"Pricing is comparable to other solutions in the market."

"The pricing could be better."

"Hitachi is more expensive than StorageGRID."

"The price of the Hitachi Content Platform is very high."

"IBM Cloud is cheaper than AWS. If you want to scale your cloud infrastructure, it can be bought at almost the same price."

"Pricing is not cheap."

"Like most cloud providers, IBM likely charges based on storage capacity, typically per gigabyte or terabyte. Their pricing is competitive when compared to AWS or Microsoft."

"You have the option of a monthly or yearly license. Most customers choose the monthly option. I understand what you would like to say. IBM also lets you choose among four types of Cloud Object Storage. The difference is usage, performance, etc. Of course, high-performance storage is more expensive, while low-performance storage is for cold data, and it's really cheap."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File and Object Storage solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

Computer Software Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

18%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

25%

Computer Software Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	21

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	4

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	4

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Pure Storage FlashBlade?

The tool's most valuable feature is its fast performance, especially in handling snapshots. It helps during power out...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Pure Storage FlashBlade?

Regarding pricing, it is okay; we needed exactly this in size, and the price was a lot lower than competitors, making...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

In my opinion, one way Pure Storage FlashBlade can be improved is by having more compatibility between the FlashArray...

See all answers

What do you like most about Hitachi Content Platform?

Integrating Hitachi Content Platform with existing systems is not challenging.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Hitachi Content Platform?

In comparison to competitors like Huawei, which can use all storage protocols in the same platform, Hitachi Content P...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Hitachi Content Platform?

Mainly, from my project, Hitachi Content Platform is used for archiving. The customer is in banking, so they need to ...

See all answers

What do you like most about IBM Cloud Object Storage?

The integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Cloud Object Storage?

In general, Object Storage should be a cheaper solution.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Cloud Object Storage?

The interface can feel clunky and outdated compared to AWS S3 or Azure Blob Storage. While scalable, latency can be...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 18% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 9% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 8% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 7% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 6% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

NetApp StorageGRID vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 19% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 14% of the time

MinIO vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 12% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 12% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Hitachi Content Platform

Compared 6% of the time

More Hitachi Content Platform Competitors

MinIO vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 18% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 16% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 11% of the time

IBM Spectrum Scale vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 8% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 7% of the time

More IBM Cloud Object Storage Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

January 2026

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

Hitachi Content Platform

January 2026

Download Hitachi Content Platform product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage

January 2026

Download IBM Cloud Object Storage product report

Also Known As

No data available

HCP, Hitachi Vantara Content Platform, Hitachi Vantara HCP

Cleversafe

Overview

FlashBlade is the industry’s most advanced scale-out storage for unstructured data, powered by a modern, massively parallel architecture to consolidate complex data silos (like backup appliances and data lakes) and accelerate tomorrow’s discoveries and insights.

Pure Storage

Hitachi Content Platform is an object storage solution that enables IT organizations and cloud service providers to store, share, sync, protect, preserve, analyze and retrieve file data from a single system. It is more efficient, easier to use, and capable of handling much more data than traditional file storage solutions. HCP automates day-to-day IT operations like data protection and readily evolves to changes in scale, scope, applications, storage, server and cloud technologies over the life of data. In IT environements where data grows quickly or must live for years, decades or even indefinitely, these capabilities are invaluable.

Hitachi Vantara

IBM Cloud Object Storage is a web-scale platform that stores unstructured data - from petabyte to exabyte - with reliability, security, availability and disaster recovery without replication.

IBM

Sample Customers

ServiceNow, Mercedes-AMG Petronas Motorsport, Dominos, Man AHL

Rabobank, Xinhua News Agency, Kremsm'ller Industrieanlagenbau KG, KSC Commercial Internet, AIS Group, Shanghai Interactive Television Co. Ltd (SiTV), China Telecom, Spin Master

Bitly, Dreamstime, Prime Research

Buyer's Guide

Hitachi Content Platform vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage

December 2025

Free Report: Hitachi Content Platform vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage

Find out what your peers are saying about Hitachi Content Platform vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Hitachi Content Platform vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage report.

See our list of best File and Object Storage vendors.

We monitor all File and Object Storage 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.