No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

OpenText Recover​ vs VMware Live Recovery comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

OpenText Recover​
Ranking in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software
35th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
VMware Live Recovery
Ranking in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
Disaster Recovery as a Service (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Disaster Recovery (DR) Software category, the mindshare of OpenText Recover​ is 0.8%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMware Live Recovery is 6.7%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Disaster Recovery (DR) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
VMware Live Recovery6.7%
OpenText Recover​0.8%
Other92.5%
Disaster Recovery (DR) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Rias Majeed - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at Exceed NetSec LLC
Allows you to test and schedule recovery tasks for multiple sites
The main weakness of Carbonite Recover is the fallback process, which can be time-consuming. However, the failover process works well when done properly. Similar to other software programs, there was a technical issue involving duplicates and small glitches. Over time, Carbonite recovery has improved. When I started working with Cyber, we had to double-check everything, and although it was challenging, the downtime wasn't extensive—one incident in a year, for example. Restoring data with Carbonite Recover can take time, mainly because the backup process occurs in real time. The main concern is the duration needed to restore data to the primary environment, which can be lengthy. However, once the failover is complete, there are no further issues.
SuhailAkhtar - PeerSpot reviewer
Integration Architect at App In Snap (Pvt) Ltd
Has enabled seamless VM management and automated failover while support response needs improvement
For support issues, they help with the issue, but it takes a very long time. The reason is that they engage a very initial resource and then escalate to another level, and during these level escalations, our time is wasted. They do not understand the severity of the issue. They go through step-by-step and then go to the upper level. This may be their SOP, but we require instant support and instant resolution of the problem, so here VMware Live Recovery is lacking. They follow their SOP, but they initially engage very low-level personnel who are not able to answer or resolve the issue, so they escalate or take a very long time to resolve the issue. The main issue is to improve the approach of resolving solutions. I may not be able to suggest new features because in these recent months, I have not been very close to it as we are exploring different solutions.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We confirm the server failure before initiating recovery. Once started, this process takes half an hour to an hour, though it can be as fast as 15 minutes. After bringing up the server, we test connectivity to ensure everything is operational."
"The solution is simple to use and has effective automation."
"If you create a proper primary recovery plan, you have good protection."
"The replication is the solution's most valuable feature. If we have some issues on the VM in the main site we can migrate it to another site automatically."
"SRM's best feature is automation."
"In terms of recovery, if you have a test job script, you can put it on top of it, you can create custom steps so that it will be more granular, and it will be an easy, one click solution when it comes to the recovery application."
"The installation and initial setup are straightforward."
"We feel the ability to move virtual machines while they are still running to be the most valuable feature."
"Incorporating non-disruptive testing capability in disaster recovery procedures has significantly benefited the overall recovery testing processes."
 

Cons

"The main weakness of Carbonite Recover is the fallback process, which can be time-consuming. However, the failover process works well when done properly. Similar to other software programs, there was a technical issue involving duplicates and small glitches."
"SRM has to be installed on two separate data centers, so both have to be coordinated very well, which becomes complicated when configuring the software for disaster recovery."
"VMware SRM needs to improve its pricing."
"In my opinion, the integration with Peer Persistent Storage could be improved."
"The solution must provide better integration with third-party vendors."
"The licenses need to be easier to quote."
"There are many functionality problems with the product currently. It is also slow and unstable."
"VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery could improve by enhancing the network bandwidth from the storage."
"Smaller sites or sites with mixed storage platforms rely on vSphere replication for DR purposes so additional scalability in this tool would benefit from this."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"SRM is reasonably priced for the functionality it provides."
"There is an annual license to use this solution."
"The pricing is good."
"VMware SRM is a little bit pricey."
"The cost of SRM is a little bit high, especially for smaller companies."
"Licensing costs explode after 75 VMs."
"I rate the tool's pricing an eight to nine out of ten."
"After Broadcom acquired the solution, the licensing cost increased drastically"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Disaster Recovery (DR) Software solutions are best for your needs.
920,939 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user159711 - PeerSpot reviewer
Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Nov 9, 2014
VMware SRM vs. Veeam vs. Zerto
Disaster recovery planning is something that seems challenging for all businesses. Virtualization in addition to its operational flexibility, and cost reduction benefits, has helped companies improve their DR posture. Virtualization has made it easier to move machines from production to…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business36
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise41
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery?
We have been using VMware Live Recovery since 2015, and most of our effort relies on it. I personally feel that it is very easy to use, easy to manage, and provides many features compared to other ...
What needs improvement with VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery?
For support issues, they help with the issue, but it takes a very long time. The reason is that they engage a very initial resource and then escalate to another level, and during these level escala...
What is your primary use case for VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery?
We are the partner as well as the integrator, and we mostly work in the integration industry. Integration is our core business, but we also do partnership activities. Most of our projects are based...
 

Also Known As

No data available
VMware Cloud Disaster Recovery, Datrium DRaaS , VMware SRM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Certainty Home Loans, VPay, ZEON
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Veeam Software, Broadcom and others in Disaster Recovery (DR) Software. Updated: October 2026.
920,939 professionals have used our research since 2012.