IBM Tivoli CDP for Files vs OpenText Data Protector comparison

IBM and OpenText are both solutions in the Backup and Recovery category. IBM is ranked #78, while OpenText is ranked #22 with an average rating of 9.0. IBM holds a 0.5% mindshare in BRS, compared to OpenText’s 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 80% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

IBM Tivoli CDP for Files

Read 1 IBM Tivoli CDP for Files review

784 Views
776 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Data Protector

Read 102 OpenText Data Protector reviews

3,326 Views
3,060 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

IBM Tivoli CDP for Files

OpenText Data Protector

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM Tivoli CDP for Files and OpenText Data Protector based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Rubrik and others in Backup and Recovery.

To learn more, read our detailed Backup and Recovery Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Backup and Recovery

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,933 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

IBM Tivoli CDP for Files

Ranking in Backup and Recovery

78th

Average Rating

9.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Data Protector

Ranking in Backup and Recovery

22nd

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

5.8

Number of Reviews

102

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Backup and Recovery category, the mindshare of IBM Tivoli CDP for Files is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Data Protector is 1.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Backup and Recovery Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Data Protector	1.0%
IBM Tivoli CDP for Files	0.5%
Other	98.5%

Backup and Recovery

Featured Reviews

reviewer1035033

Sr. Aix Admin at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Restoration and infrastructure are extremely reliable

We are currently using Tivoli to backup 15 terabytes within our Oracle Database using a RMAN backup script. The RMAN's utility and restoration has been perfect, we have yet to experience any issues. It's very reliable The restoration and infrastructure are extremely reliable. We would like to…

Read full review

Ahmad-Hassan

Project Manager And Technical Consultant at EEMC

Provides effective backup for physical servers and needs improvements for cloud compatibility

We use OpenText Data Protector for Oracle database backup and some applications that run for database security OpenText Data Protector is good for physical backup, specifically for physical servers. It is effective for direct backups to EMC library or storage without using a repository. However,…

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 restoration and infrastructure is extremely reliable."

"The integration of the tool benefits our organization, and the support is unified from one company for all data, storage, and backup processes."

"The granularity of brick-level restore functionality is very valuable."

"The initial setup is straightforward if you understand Data Protector."

"Data Protector's GUI is the most useful feature."

"Overall, when compared with other restore solutions, I can say most of the good features are packed inside a software that has a small footprint."

"The dashboards in Micro Focus Data Protector are very good. They are similar to the dashboards in Veeam Backup & Replication."

"This solution is quite stable because we have only three users."

"Data Protector allows us to improve our SLA in successful backups and the reporting tools integrated with our management console make possible 99% backup success in our clients."

More OpenText Data Protector pros

Cons

"We would like to have the opportunity to omit data from being backed up. For example, we have three virtual machines, each with three disks. When running the backup, it will automatically take each disk rather than allowing us to select what data we want backed."

"The graphical interface needs to be improved."

"The online backups of Office 365 have room for improvement. This is now available for the Exchange Online part of Office 365, but we're still waiting for SharePoint Online, Teams, etc. We know that it's coming, but it takes time."

"Actually, we're moving away from Data Protector due to lack of support on newer operating systems and latest products."

"It works with virtual machines, but it's way too complex right now."

"I do not think that this solution is relevant in the current IT market. They have not upgraded their features and functionalities which makes it difficult for them to remain competitive."

"I really wouldn't recommend others to use this solution - especially when it comes to the technical support."

"Be ready for an exercise in frustration, but once all the problems are resolved, then you’re OK."

"We would like to have a direct plugin to VMware. It could also be simplified, made more usable and manageable."

More OpenText Data Protector cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's expensive, but it's worth for it due to the volume of critical information within our database. We are currently paying about $22,000 per year."

"The licensing structure provides cost savings to business."

"Our licensing is on a capacity basis."

"It is fast, reliable, and its licensing policy is great."

"It is more affordable compared to other vendors."

"Data Protector's pricing is very competitive and we have no issues in this regard. I would give it an eight out of ten in terms of pricing."

"Pricing/licensing is Data Protector's single best offering. In its most basic environment, the only license required is for whatever target device is required."

"Pricing for Micro Focus Data Protector is reasonable."

"The solution requires paying for a license."

More OpenText Data Protector pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Backup and Recovery solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Marketing Services Firm

13%

Performing Arts

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	28
Midsize Enterprise	22
Large Enterprise	61

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Data Protector?

The solution is expensive as it requires purchasing all features without the option to negotiate based on client numbers, unlike Veeam which offers flexibility in pricing.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Micro Focus Data Protector?

OpenText Data Protector is not user-friendly, especially for cloud backup. It lacks functions and facilities compared to Veeam, which offers more user-friendliness for virtual machine backups. Ther...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Data Protector?

We use OpenText Data Protector ( /products/opentext-data-protector-reviews ) for Oracle database backup and some applications that run for database security.

See all answers

Comparisons

Veeam Data Platform vs IBM Tivoli CDP for Files

Compared 25% of the time

Commvault Cloud vs IBM Tivoli CDP for Files

Compared 20% of the time

IBM Storage Protect vs IBM Tivoli CDP for Files

Compared 18% of the time

Cohesity Data Cloud vs IBM Tivoli CDP for Files

Compared 13% of the time

Arcserve UDP vs IBM Tivoli CDP for Files

Compared 11% of the time

More IBM Tivoli CDP for Files Competitors

Veeam Data Platform vs OpenText Data Protector

Compared 10% of the time

Commvault Cloud vs OpenText Data Protector

Compared 5% of the time

Symantec Data Loss Prevention vs OpenText Data Protector

Compared 4% of the time

Dell Data Protection Advisor vs OpenText Data Protector

Compared 3% of the time

Barracuda Backup vs OpenText Data Protector

Compared 2% of the time

More OpenText Data Protector Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Backup and Recovery

February 2026

Download IBM Tivoli CDP for Files product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Data Protector

March 2026

Download OpenText Data Protector product report

Also Known As

Tivoli CDP for Files

Micro Focus Data Protector, Data Protector, OmniBack, HPE Data Protector

Overview

IBM Tivoli Continuous Data Protection for Files is a continuous backup software that protects your most important files. This real-time, continuous data protection solution for file servers and user endpoints automatically backs up your most critical files the moment they are saved.

IBM

OpenText Data Protector standardizes and consolidates backups across multiple platforms. It provides secure, comprehensive backup protection for business-critical data and applications whether virtual, physical, or online in the cloud.

OpenText

Sample Customers

Cyberian Data Protection

GSK Vaccines, Repsol, Vodafone Group, Siemens AG, Medium Enterprise Transportation Services Company

Find out what your peers are saying about Veeam Software, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Rubrik and others in Backup and Recovery. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Backup and Recovery vendors.

We monitor all Backup and Recovery 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.