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 8.3. IBM holds a 1.1% mindshare in FaOS, compared to NetApp’s 5.1% 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: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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 January 2026, in the File and Object Storage category, the mindshare of Pure Storage FlashBlade is 5.3%, down from 6.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Cloud Object Storage is 1.1%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetApp StorageGRID is 5.1%, down from 5.3% 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	5.3%
NetApp StorageGRID	5.1%
IBM Cloud Object Storage	1.1%
Other	88.5%

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

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

Michael Lopez

Sr Systems Engineer at a outsourcing company with 10,001+ employees

Has reduced storage costs and improved snapshot management for large data workloads

The advanced features of NetApp StorageGRID which our upper management wouldn't agree to use, include the S3 feature. We are heavy into AWS, and my thoughts were to develop a small dev environment or even a POC environment on-prem. That's still up in the air as we continue on. Currently, AI has taken over everything with a focus on AI. The upgrades of NetApp StorageGRID present a challenge. It's a rolling upgrade, node by node. At one point, one node would not upgrade. The positive aspect is that it didn't take down the entire environment. The environment remained functional on two different versions. The scalability of NetApp StorageGRID has been proven as we've expanded twice. We started with six or seven nodes and have grown to 15 nodes. It does take time for synchronization to complete. From what I've seen, it took a couple of months for it all to sync up once adding nodes. However, it was transparent. It captured the addition and performed effectively, all happening in the background, steadily and surely.

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

"It is very easy to use, and it is very fast."

"It helps simplify our storage, because the user interface is very simple and the installation is easy."

"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."

"The main feature I have found to be product replication."

"The solution provides many controllers."

"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 features are data warehousing, speedy recovery, and analytics. Its latest release is cost-effective."

"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."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pros

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

"IBM Cloud Object Storage integrates well."

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Cost-effective and easy to deploy."

"The feature of NetApp StorageGRID that has significantly improved data storage management for my customers is the value of the S3 API because it allows developers who are not infrastructure-oriented to use it and write code against it."

"The feature of StorageGRID that I find most valuable for ensuring data durability and protection is its Information Lifecycle Management functionality."

"StorageGRID is designed for cloud-based, highly scalable storage. Think big names like service providers like Google who need massive storage volumes with scalability. It also offers cloud-enabled storage capabilities with cloud management functionality. So, if you prioritize scalability and cloud integration, StorageGRID is the way to go. Its object-based storage is built specifically for that purpose."

"The most valuable feature is tiering."

"The technical support team is reliable and responsive."

"NetApp StorageGRID is a great alternative to AWS S3 buckets."

More NetApp StorageGRID pros

Cons

"I want efficiency. FlashBlade doesn't have efficiency now."

"It's on the expensive side, as expected for a niche product."

"In my opinion, one way Pure Storage FlashBlade can be improved is by having more compatibility between the FlashArray and FlashBlade, allowing for synchronized data between both platforms."

"I would like to see more deduplication."

"In terms of technical support, the experience has been mixed. The support is done through email and is not that great, making it a very problematic area I've been dealing with for over four years."

"The documentational aspect of FlashBlade needs improvement."

"Compared to, for example, Hitachi NAS, the solution is not mature at all. It's just in its infancy as far as technology goes."

"I would like to see better integration."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade cons

"IBM has limited cloud storage."

"If I had to choose one area, it would be making the consoles more intuitive would be helpful. Sometimes, they can be a little complicated if you're not familiar with them."

"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."

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

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

"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."

"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."

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

More IBM Cloud Object Storage cons

"They can enhance the deduplication and compression features, which are crucial for saving more disk space. It's not at the same level as the NetApp filer or the real NetApp cluster that runs itself on its architecture, as StorageGRID is a software solution that emulates a RAID level."

"We want to move towards Azure in the cloud. Right now, the system is all physical."

"It has its quirks here and there, but it is an older NetApp system."

"The user interface of NetApp StorageGRID might need some tweaks, and configuration is maybe a little bit confusing for those who are not so experienced."

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

"There was a small amount of confusion when working with StorageGRID and Active Directory for access. We had to do things three to four times resulting in our engineer troubleshooting a couple of things. The location of the menu, along with what is inside the menu: configurations, settings, etc., is not straightforward to users. Most users are Windows-based. So, when make logical changes to the menu which are not similar to Windows, users and administrators get confused."

"Data retrieval speed could be better."

"The user interface of NetApp StorageGRID might need some tweaks, and configuration is maybe a little bit confusing for those who are not so experienced."

More NetApp StorageGRID cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is relatively expensive due to the FlashBlade technology. However, for companies needing quick and reliable data access, the cost is justified."

"Our licensing is renewed annually."

"The product is very expensive."

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

"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."

"Our customers have seen a reduction in TCO."

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

"The price is a little high."

More Pure Storage FlashBlade pricing and cost advice

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"We save money on storage costs from this solution since it allows us to have a source of revenue from customers consuming the service."

"I rate the product pricing around five out of ten—it's negotiable, depending on the circumstances."

"The price is attractive."

"We chose NetApp because of price and performance."

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

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

881,082 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

Financial Services Firm

25%

Computer Software Company

16%

Government

University

Financial Services Firm

20%

Manufacturing Company

16%

Computer Software Company

12%

University

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	3
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	4

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	11

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 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?

As an administrator, I was not involved in the pricing of NetApp StorageGRID. From what I understood, it was cheaper ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with NetApp StorageGRID?

The upgrades of NetApp StorageGRID present challenges. It's a rolling upgrade, node by node. At one point, one node w...

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 9% of the time

VAST Data vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 7% of the time

Qumulo vs Pure Storage FlashBlade

Compared 3% of the time

More Pure Storage FlashBlade Competitors

MinIO vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 25% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 18% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 13% of the time

IBM Spectrum Scale vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 8% of the time

VAST Data vs IBM Cloud Object Storage

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM Cloud Object Storage Competitors

MinIO vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 22% of the time

Dell ObjectScale vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 20% of the time

Red Hat Ceph Storage vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 16% of the time

Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 6% of the time

Scality RING vs NetApp StorageGRID

Compared 6% of the time

More NetApp StorageGRID Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Pure Storage FlashBlade

January 2026

Download Pure Storage FlashBlade product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM Cloud Object Storage

January 2026

Download IBM Cloud Object Storage product report

Buyer's Guide

NetApp StorageGRID

January 2026

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

December 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: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 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.