IBM Cloud Object Storage vs NetApp StorageGRID comparison

IBM and NetApp are both solutions in the File and Object Storage category. IBM is ranked #12 with an average rating of 9.3, while NetApp is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.0. IBM holds a 1.1% mindshare in FaOS, compared to NetApp’s 5.9% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 88% of NetApp users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

IBM Cloud Object Storage and NetApp StorageGRID compete in the scalable data storage solutions category. Data comparisons indicate IBM holds an advantage in pricing and support satisfaction, whereas NetApp excels with advanced features that justify the cost for many businesses.

Features: IBM Cloud Object Storage offers comprehensive elasticity, efficient cost management, and integrated AI capabilities for enhanced data analytics. It is particularly suitable for dynamic storage needs. NetApp StorageGRID provides rich metadata management, policy-driven data placement, and seamless hybrid cloud integration, making it appealing for enterprises prioritizing versatility.

Room for Improvement: IBM Cloud Object Storage could improve in areas such as user interface customization, extended support for third-party integrations, and more flexible data migration options. NetApp StorageGRID may benefit from streamlining setup processes, enhancing user training resources, and reducing initial deployment complexity.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM ensures straightforward deployment with robust customer service, allowing rapid integration with existing systems. NetApp StorageGRID requires a more structured setup, benefiting organizations needing detailed data distribution capabilities. IBM is generally favored for its responsive support and service reliability.

Pricing and ROI: IBM delivers competitive initial setup costs with a solid ROI due to efficient scalability and low-cost management. NetApp StorageGRID may incur higher setup expenses but provides superior ROI through strategic data lifecycle management, which is advantageous for businesses focusing on long-term data handling efficiency. The choice depends on budget and strategic goals.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,295 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 August 2025, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.8%, down from 6.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Cloud Object Storage is 1.1%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp StorageGRID is 5.9%, up from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File and Object Storage

Featured Reviews

Eric Black

Solutions Architect at Recovery Point Systems

The ability to leverage multi-tenancy along with immutability is a huge benefit for us

The only thing I feel FlashBlade is missing is the SOS API. If it had SOS API, that would put it well over the top. Veeam Backup specifically has started to streamline their API, and they are doing that with SOS API. They have optimized it. Any of the S3 devices out there that support this SOS API can have far more API calls at once. On our side, that translates to better restoration. With SOS API, it can leverage far more restorations at a single given time or read from the device in simple terms. That results in maximizing the output and throughput from the device itself.

Read full review

Steve Qualls

Senior Storage Engineer at Q & Q IT Consulting

Offers the ease with which you can move data between on-premises storage and the cloud and then retrieve it back on-premises when necessary

IBM Cloud Object Storage supports big data and analytics workflows. However, I usually have to refer to my documentation for that. Cloud environments are part of almost every project I've been involved in over the last few years, but I rely heavily on documentation whenever I need to do anything in the cloud. I know the basics, but the technical details always need refreshing. I create the drawings or diagrams of how the on-premises and cloud environments interact. So, visual representations are helpful. I'll diagram the on-premises environment, the cloud environment, and any appliances in between and then work from there. The integration capabilities simplified our data workflows. Like, the integration itself is pretty easy. The access appliances create the connection between both environments.

Read full review

Mir Gulzar Ahmed

IT Manager at Synergy Computers

Object-based storage and offers intuitive management tools, making it easy to configure and maintain

The only thing missing is flexibility in configuration to cater to specific customer requirements. Another area of improvement is marketing. NetApp's marketing of StorageGRID isn't optimal. They should present it more effectively, especially in regions like Pakistan. Here, I haven't seen any marketing campaigns from NetApp for StorageGRID or the Solid State Platform (SSP). While StorageGRID is a globally recognized product, I haven't seen any marketing efforts from NetApp in Pakistan. Even competitors are promoting object storage solutions here, but NetApp seems less efficient in selling StorageGRID. There might be one or two customers, but even as a NetApp partner, I'm not aware of any major sales. I've been trained on StorageGRID, and it is a good product. I'm unsure why it hasn't gained traction in Pakistan compared to other countries. So, I just recommend improving the marketing campaigns in Pakistan. I'm pretty confident that if we have one example of successful StorageGRID implementation in Pakistan, other customers will follow suit.

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 solution provides many controllers."

"It has absolutely simplified our storage because the dashboards on the consoles show a clear understanding of where you are, and it is also very easy to provision. This been a big help for our teams."

"The most valuable features of FlashBlade include its replication capabilities, reports, and easy allocation. Everything is user-friendly."

"We have seen a reduction in the total cost of ownership by around 20%."

"I like its size. It is smaller than the other competitors. We can plug in many blades, and we can have data up to one terabyte."

"It uses the same platform for connectivity so integration is seamless."

"The ease of deployment and management has helped us simplify our storage. We also do not have to worry about capacity management as much. A lot of these things are native to Pure Storage."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

"The standout feature of IBM Cloud Object Storage is its top-notch security, making it ideal for sensitive applications like mobile financial transactions."

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

"IBM Cloud Object Storage integrates well."

"The most valuable feature I like is when you connect it via CLI plug-in...It is a stable solution."

"Overall, I rate IBM Cloud Object Storage a ten out of ten."

"The capability to replicate data in different locations is valuable since it enables customers to have a cluster over various sites."

"IBM has the most number of additional services, this is the main advantage."

"One of Cloud Object Storage's best features is infinite capacity. This is one of the main advantages if you don't want to use your own storage. You also have the ability to write only, write once, and read many. It's like tape storage but software-based. This feature is essential for financial institutions that require that kind of protection if you write backup or data there."

"The implementation with NetApp went smoothly. It is a 'setup and forget' type of appliance."

"The technical support is good."

"The most valuable feature is tiering."

"Duplication, interface and the manageability is good and simple."

"NetApp StorageGRID is a great alternative to AWS S3 buckets. Erasure coding is very valuable."

"The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to restore data compared to our previous methods."

"It helps automate our storage infrastructure."

"It has awesome scalability. We consume it with storage appliance nodes, then we just plug and play as we need more."

More NetApp StorageGRID pros

Cons

"It would be beneficial if the layer could support the S3 protocol and be container ready in the next release."

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

"Commvault has mainly driven the Analytics, providing data and reports. However, the product has room for improvement, especially regarding storage analytics. Upgrading firmware has caused issues, requiring feature disabling to revert to traditional backups. The firmware upgrades sometimes affect Commvault backups."

"I would like to see more monitoring capability included in the next release of this solution."

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

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

"The feature that we're waiting on is better integration with the cell services."

"The Pure Storage Orchestrator is our biggest pain point at the moment. If we can have more say in future developments of feature sets that we will need to support for our use case, that would be pretty beneficial to us."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"IBM has limited cloud storage."

"Sometimes technical support lacks a comprehensive understanding of the entire solution, only focusing on the product they support."

"One area where IBM Cloud Object Storage could potentially improve is in modernizing its underlying codebase."

"Room for improvement depends on customer needs. Some customers prefer pure Object Storage using the S3 protocol, while others use a gateway in front of the storage grid to enable CIFS or NFS."

"IBM Cloud storage is not cheap, but it could be."

"One improvement could be incorporating a feature similar to Dropbox's version history. This would allow users to track modifications made to files over time, which is particularly important for maintaining a record of changes. While the free version might not include this feature, it could be included in the paid version to provide added value to clients. Additionally, having a version history feature that allows users to access modifications made to files over the past three months could be beneficial."

"The performance could be better. It isn't bad, but everything is network-based, so you have a performance penalty on the network. You can never achieve the same performance as hardware. That's the disadvantage of cloud storage solutions in general. Cloud performance is one of the main issues clients have."

"The performance could improve in IBM Cloud Object Storage. The throughput or objects per second can have degradation."

More IBM Cloud Object Storage cons

"They can enhance the deduplication and compression features, which are crucial for saving more disk space."

"The integration with more apps has room for improvement."

"Improvements need to be made in the support area."

"One key improvement I'd like to see in StorageGRID is enhanced visibility for management purposes."

"The price is something that NetApp could improve, as with most companies. NetApp is known for not being the cheapest storage option, which is also valid for StorageGRID. There are other storage options on the market which we are aware of and have done proofs of concept for, but you cannot really compare the list prices because, as a big user of NetApp storages, we have totally different prices than some list prices. Still, the price information we got for other options are almost always less expensive than StorageGRID."

"The processes around installation and upgrade need improvement."

"The redundancy and reliability are great, but I also see room for improvement there. I would like to see more efficiency in the storage and dedupe/compression solutions."

"Data retrieval speed could be better."

More NetApp StorageGRID cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I understand that it is competitively priced compared to other brands."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

"I feel that the price could always be lowered."

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

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

"Support is a separate line item. Support is a different cost, but whatever your support is now, that's what you're going to pay forever. If your support's $100 today, six years from now it's $100. It doesn't fluctuate unless you upgrade it, or change it, etc."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"The price of this solution could be made more affordable."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"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."

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

"It is very cost-effective."

"While we have been able to save money on storage costs, it could be better."

"The pricing is quite flexible and depends on the specific customer requirements. The initial cost is primarily based on the desired capacity, so it's not a fixed price."

"NetApp is not known for being the cheapest storage option on the market. Almost all of the other storage options we looked at were less expensive than StorageGRID. The price is one thing to criticize, which is what we hear internally and from customers as well. They find the cost of the terabytes in this class of storage a little bit higher than expected."

"The licensing that the S3 service provides them from a FabricPool standpoint is more attractive than the licensing from AWS or Azure."

"Buying the solution is expensive, but it saves you money down the line when you factor in the logistics of not having to buy tapes."

"We chose NetApp because of price and performance."

"Creating your own data stores, backups, or storage grids, helps eliminate all these costs of downloading all the data back after you downloaded to the cloud."

More NetApp StorageGRID pricing and cost advice

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

865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Financial Services Firm

27%

Computer Software Company

18%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

20%

Manufacturing Company

19%

Computer Software Company

14%

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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?

The pricing of Pure Storage FlashBlade is expensive compared to other products I used from other companies in the pas...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Pure Storage FlashBlade?

I believe there is not much improvement needed because they have everything we need, but the interface is a little bi...

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

What do you like most about NetApp StorageGRID?

The management portals have most significantly improved our data retrieval times. They've made it much easier to rest...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetApp StorageGRID?

It would definitely be more on the expensive side, especially if you compare it with open source solutions like Ceph.

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp StorageGRID?

If I could change anything in NetApp StorageGRID, that would be pricing. In terms of functionality, reliability, and ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 19% of the time

MinIO vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Pure Storage FlashArray vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 10% of the time

Scality RING vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 2% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

MinIO vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 34% of the time

Dell ECS vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 33% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 21% of the time

IBM Spectrum Scale vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 11% of the time

More IBM Cloud Object Storage Competitors

MinIO vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 25% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 24% of the time

Dell ECS vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 22% of the time

Scality RING vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 6% of the time

Cloudian HyperStore vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 3% of the time

More NetApp StorageGRID Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

August 2025

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage

August 2025

Download IBM Cloud Object Storage product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID

August 2025

Download NetApp StorageGRID product report

Also Known As

No data available

Cleversafe

Storage GRID

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

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

Store and manage unstructured data at scale using NetApp StorageGRID for secure, durable object storage. Place content in the right location, at the right time, and on the right storage tier, optimizing workflows and reducing overall costs for globally distributed rich media.

NetApp

Sample Customers

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

Bitly, Dreamstime, Prime Research

ASE, DARZ GmbH

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID

July 2025

Free Report: IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID 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.