HPE Zerto Software Reviews

We implemented Zerto because we wanted a flexible and quick tool that allowed us to recover in different situations. This purpose was successfully fulfilled by Zerto during the proof of concept phase, so we implemented it.

Zerto helps with quick recovery and integration with other processes. Providing as a service approach allows end-users to operate and perform recovery operations on their own assets based on their requirements and schedule preferences. It helps not only with recovery but also with DR tests that need to be executed at specific time frames, such as out-of-business hours. We had a few different requirements during its implementation, and Zerto helped us very well with all these needs.

Zerto has some specific options for replication, but it is mainly for virtual machines. We mainly use it for virtual machines. Zerto is not suitable for physical servers, but it can be used for virtual solutions such as OpenShift, Kubernetes, etc. In terms of its effect on our RPO, as I have not used a similar solution previously, the RPO value that we are getting is very good. It fits the requirements that we have from our customers because what we provide to our customers needs to be proven by the tests that we perform. Usually, their expectations are much lower than what we receive from Zerto. For example, we have application owners for whom 24 hours duration is enough to recover the business as compared to the 10 minutes that I have using Zerto. We use Zerto in real DR exercises and ask our customers to verify the results and the status of the recovered system and answer if the recovery was successful. We provide them the time needed to recover their system, and often, it is much quicker than what they require, so from our perspective, Zerto is very good. However, we cannot verify everything because we have some limitations in our DR test scenario. I can be 100% sure of the results of recovery only in the case of a real disaster on my infrastructure. At this time, based on the DR tests, it meets my customer needs.

We conduct DR exercises at least twice a year to measure the downtime we would have in the case of a real disaster. We simulate the disaster in a controlled environment and perform all related exercises. Once all activities are performed, we measure the time needed to recover systems from the data center that is down due to a natural disaster or technical issue. We get an idea of the downtime but the actual downtime varies depending on the issue type. It might not always be predictable or reduced through tooling as network or server issues can arise. In some specific scenarios, the downtime could be lower by using Zerto, whereas in some cases, Zerto would not help much. Based on the results of disaster recovery exercises and the RTO measured not only for one application but for recovering all of the applications in affected data centers, we can say that the time we need to recover the full data center is much lower than using traditional backup recovery solutions. Recovery with Zerto is much faster because we can recover in parallel many systems.

I am quite familiar with the user interface. It is easy for me to operate and perform different operations because I am an experienced user. In my opinion, the user interface is easy to understand and operate. The user interface is user-friendly.

Another important feature is the tool's automation capabilities, as it provides an external API to integrate with other tools and processes. This allows for a comprehensive IT ecosystem within a single dashboard, tailored to specific needs. Some operations can be limited for end-users. All of this can be provided not only through the GUI but also using the API. You can create your own application, integrate it with Zerto API, and develop features in your own application. You can use the API to integrate with your application and provide only the features that you want to end-users, facilitating custom application development. You can split the responsibilities based on the roles provided as well as based on your requirements. It is very flexible. From my point of view, the end-user experience is very good as an administrator of the tool and as the person responsible for the disaster recovery process.

As a user who used Zerto for eight years, there are specific issues that it cannot address. For instance, recovering physical servers is directly connected to the virtualized solution in use, meaning your infrastructure needs a VMware or Hyper-V solution. It cannot be used for bare metal physical server solutions. One improvement could be addressing the market segment related to physical servers. I understand this is a limitation of Zerto's technology. Still, from a customer's perspective, I would ask the vendor to find a solution to use Zerto for virtualized physical systems, such as physical servers. 

A second area for improvement relates to the speed of implementation. There should be a more streamlined process for enterprise applications.

I have used Zerto for about eight years.

I did not encounter any issues during the operations, so I would rate it a nine out of ten for stability, so there is room for improvement on the vendor's side.

From my perspective, given the size of my infrastructure and the limitations based on the vendor's requirements and documentation, it fulfills my needs. Therefore, I would rate it a ten out of ten because I have not faced a situation where I needed more than what it provides.

It is being used at multiple locations.

I have the opportunity to use Zerto support, and I have used it many times for various questions and solving different issues or problems I encountered in my infrastructure. I would give them a rating of ten because it represents the highest level of support based on the technical knowledge of the support team, response time, and effectiveness of the provided resolutions.

Zerto was the first tool I started using once I took on the disaster recovery manager role in my company. I did not have experience with other tools.

The speed of implementation is an area for improvement. While deployment on straightforward infrastructure is easy, an enterprise company with strict access and vulnerability limitations requires manual configurations. This is neither easy nor quick. 

Implementation depends on the environment and customers. From an enterprise perspective, I expect a more streamlined implementation process, as many steps require manual action. This challenge is specific to my company due to limited access and port blockages. Implementing such tools is a one-time task. My intention is to provide feedback related to the installation process, not the operation.

I do not have much experience with different tools, so I cannot directly compare Zerto with other solutions. While conducting our proof of concept, I compared prices with just one other vendor. At the time, the price for Zerto was more favorable. Since I only use this tool and I do not have the need for others, it is difficult to compare the price now.

Zerto is an asynchronous replication solution. It provides what they call near-zero RPO value. There is a delay of a few seconds depending on the parameters of your infrastructure, such as the bandwidth, the workload in your infrastructure, the distance between data center latencies, and the speed of the network connections. There is no one solution that meets all the needs. You need to decide whether you need a synchronous or asynchronous solution. You should be aware of the pros and cons of both and the requirements of your organization. Synchronous replication might be risky in some specific situations. What looks good on paper might not always be good in reality. Zerto meets our needs for flexibility. It mitigates different problems related to infrastructure, even though there is always the possibility of losing some data.

I would rate Zerto a ten out of ten considering the features, support, feature development roadmap, and the frequency of new features provided to customers.

I use Zerto for continuous data protection.

The solution is very effective at preventing ransomware attacks. 

We have very good security now. It's enhanced our security. It has also massively improved disaster recovery.

The solution offers the shortest RPO time, the five-second RPO time, and continuous replication. The RPO is beyond our expectations. It's improved our RPO rate by 50%. These are great features. We have enhanced our security level after using Zerto, and there is a massive improvement in disaster recovery as well.

It's a straightforward product.

The near-synchronous replication is a great feature.

We've used Zerto to protect our virtual machines. 

It's impacted our RTOs by improving it by 200%.

Zerto has reduced downtime. We now have zero downtime using this product. It's improved overall by 90%.

We've saved a lot of time with Zerto. It's hard to quantify since we don't have any ransomware getting attacks.

It's reduced our disaster recovery testing by 50%.

It's helped our IT resiliency strategy by 100%. Before this solution, we didn't have a solution in place. Now, we are quite resilient. 

I don't see any improvements needed so far; we really enjoy using this product. However, there could be improvements in support. Here, in Malaysia, there is no on-site support.

I have used the solution for between one to two years.

I would rate the stability ten out of ten.

I would rate the scalability ten out of ten.

I would rate the customer service five out of ten. There is room for improvement. We need more local support.

Neutral

We only have experience with Zerto. I can't compare it to other products. 

The initial setup took one day. It was easy.

We have Zerto deployed on-prem. We have it deployed in multiple locations. 

The solution does not require any maintenance. 

The implementation was done by just two to four people.

The return on investment has been around 50% to 60%.

Zerto is cost-efficient.

Zerto has fortified and improved the resilience of our IT infrastructure. We currently experience zero downtime and use it to protect our virtual machines. The improvement exceeds our target. However, we desire more local support.

I'd recommend the solution to other users. It offers a short RPO time and will fortify a company's IT infrastructure. 

I rate the product ten out of ten. We're a Zerto customer. 

Our company uses Zerto very heavily all the time for DR activities and other activities. We are only maintaining our tier one applications with Zerto while using different tools for our tier two, tier three, and tier four applications. But only for tier one and tier two, we are using Zerto.

Zerto's product and support are unparalleled. Their responsiveness sets them apart from other vendors, as they swiftly engage with customers and manage to sort issues out quickly during calls, without needless delays for log submissions. Their replication service also boasts a sub-10-second RPO and I often see servers synced as quickly as 6 to 7 seconds.

I think Zerto should make the product less expensive, as that's the only reason many people are not registering the product with their companies. We are not using Zerto everywhere across the board, probably due to licensing costs; it could be excessive to manage it. That's why we are only maintaining our tier one applications with Zerto while using different tools for our tier two, tier three, and tier four applications. I definitely think it's expensive, and that's why we are not using that product for the other applications for tier four and beyond.

I have been using Zerto for more than 5 years; I would say almost 7-8 years.

We do see some impact sometimes on our RPOs due to various reasons; it could be because the cluster on the source side may not be stable, or we might have migrated the host to a different cluster where Zerto was not configured.

I am very familiar with Zerto, which is a very good service provider. We had very good feedback. Every time when I work with them, I always receive a really positive response from them and a good solution. Whenever we come across any problem, they try to jump on the call right away. They have very little waiting time. When I open a ticket, within an hour or so, or less than an hour, someone will get connected to me. The good part is that normally, when I work with other vendors, they always look for various logs; they tell us to upload it and try to buy time for almost 3-4 hours by asking questions and wasting time to provide logs when I really need it. Zerto is not like that; they try to jump on a call with you. Another good aspect is that they provide guidance to upgrade our product to be under the supported version if the product is not a supported version. Unlike other companies, they don't just say, 'We don't support the product; follow this document and upgrade.' Instead, Zerto actually makes sure that you have a successful upgrade on your product so that they can support it.

Positive

I used Storix in the past to recover apart from Zerto; we use Storix as well. The biggest difference is the faster recovery with Zerto compared to Storix. As I mentioned, Zerto's product and support are good, too. I was not complaining about the Storix product; they were good but not better than Zerto.

The deployment for the first time definitely requires knowing about the product and how it works, so you need training. Any new person will not be able to manage or do it unless they know how to get things to work. You need proper documentation. Installing the product for the first time is definitely not easy if someone is not aware of the product, but we need to know about the product and how it works to install it for the first time.

The product really provides good support. I'm not aware of the pricing as I'm not from management, but the product is really good. I love the product and their support. If they need any logs, they will try to get them during the call. In that way, the customer can understand that they are really responsible for the product they are providing and they try to help us out. We feel comfortable while comparing them with other vendors because I have worked with many vendors, and I can say that only Microsoft vendors are as good as Zerto in terms of jumping on calls right away to help you out. By using their product, we reduce the downtime of our outage, so if anything goes wrong, I use the Zerto product to reduce downtime. My team has used that one to ensure that we don't experience much downtime. On a scale of 1-10, I rate Zerto a 9.

I am actually a value-added reseller. I personally do not use Zerto. I have customers that use Zerto, and they use it as their cyber recovery. They have also used it to move VMs.

When exactly a company can expect the benefits of Zerto depends on the use case scenario. In the instances I have seen with my customer, it has been both near and immediate-term benefits. Since it is easier for them to use and they are able to work with it and get their workloads done, they also saw benefits from a budget standpoint down the road.

The most valuable features in Zerto are ease of use number one and the support that has come from the Zerto team. They have been very hands-on with 'we are here to help you, train you and teach you how to fish, so you can drive it yourself.'

For us, the impact that Zerto has had on the IT resiliency strategy is that we use it as a way to help our customers set up data recovery should something happen. What we appreciate about it is the snapshot and how much easier it is to access.

The near synchronous replication works very well. This is not my experience. It is my customer's experience. They have been very happy with it. They had a bunch of VMs they wanted to move since they wanted to migrate some stuff, and it worked very well for them. It actually helped them beat their timeline as it worked so well. They were going to have a very, very, very hefty renewal that they had to pay. And so it saved them lots of money. It worked quickly and they were able to meet their timeline.

It's helped with DR testing. 

Better communication around pricing would be useful - particularly in light of the economic and tariff situation we have going on.

I have been using Zerto for three years.

We have not had any reports of instability in Zerto from clients. The use case I keep coming back to is our customer who used it to move a bunch of VMs. Once they got it up and deployed, they handily beat their schedule. At one point, they thought they were not going to get all the VMs moved and would have to do a renewal on part of them, however, the ease of use was so good with Zerto that they were able to migrate things much quicker.

Zerto's scalability has been good. One of the things that works for our customer set is what they call t-shirt sizing with extra small, small, medium, large, extra large and jumbo. Those are nice to have as a starting point to talk to a customer, however, then you can go in and tailor that specifically to the customer's needs.

I haven't had a need to contact Zerto's technical support.

Positive

I have used or sold alternatives to Zerto such as Veeam, Commvault, and Rubrik. Zerto is the clear winner.

I find that the initial deployment of Zerto for a client is quite easy. The instances where we rolled it out at customers, the deployment has gone very smoothly. There seems to be something intuitive about Zerto that makes it easier for folks in a company to use.

There's not really any maintenance needed once deployed. 

On average, four people are required for the deployment.

The pricing is competitive.

If I were to compare Zerto to its competitors, Zerto is the winner in data recovery.

I am not a technical person, so I cannot answer that from a technical standpoint regarding what Zerto does better or worse than its competitors. I can answer it from a customer ease of use perspective. The biggest thing we have heard is that it is easy to use and intuitive. The sales teams and technical resources that Zerto has are there to help answer questions and teach the customer how to use it in their environment, so they are able to do things after the Zerto resources are no longer there.

My clients have tried to protect the virtual machines in their environment. I have not seen any effects on RPOs or RTOs. I am an official reseller of Zerto.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Zerto overall a nine.

I initially started using it as a disaster recovery solution, and I am still using it as a cyber test recovery solution. I also began to use it as a migration tool for cloud, from on-premises to cloud.

The replication feature stands out. The way I can sync servers from on-premises to the cloud ensures the consistency of the VMs without hampering their state. This is a very beneficial feature. Once replication is initialized, the complete state of the server is replicated, known as the initial sync. Subsequently, the Bitmap sync occurs, capturing changes on the protected server in real-time and replicating them to the protected site as well. For example, my primary site in Austin, Texas, used to recover to Santa Clara. Recovery was previously tedious, taking a whole day for all servers to bring up and validate their consistency. With the deployment of Zerto, this has significantly improved.

In newer versions, the success rate compared to older versions is quite low. I have tried to implement Zerto version ten in my environment, but for some reason, multiple errors occur, forcing me to revert to the previous version. Despite the previous version being out of support, there is no alternative to getting the newer version working. For example, when a requirement arises to replicate one server located in a different vCenter to another site, I download the latest version and deploy it, but I face issues deploying the VRA agent on the ESX host. This keeps failing despite multiple cases raised with Zerto support, none resolved in a timely manner. By the time the issue is looked into, it is often too late for my requirements, leading me to abandon Zerto ten installation and revert to the earlier versions. Presently, there is an open case with Zerto support concerning Zerto ten deployment issues, yet no fix has been provided. Hopefully, a resolution will be found soon.

I have been using the solution for five to six years.

Initially, I had a few stability issues. While some remain unresolved despite submitting cases, I have found workarounds. These issues do exist, as random crashes occur. Understanding how it works, I avoid troubleshooting, which risks the replication servers. Instead, I promptly delete the malfunctioning elements and set them up again to resume replication, ensuring stability.

In terms of basic troubleshooting, they perform well. However, when engineering support is required, delays occur. One notable example is the challenges faced during total implementation. I have raised three to four cases, yet due to urgency and delays, they were not resolved on time. When more complex issues arise, support takes additional time, but they handle simpler issues within two to three days.

Neutral

Earlier, I used Site Recovery Manager from VMware, which had errors and delays, and was not as flexible compared to Zerto. This prompted me to switch to Zerto. I am also using ASR, the Azure Site Recovery Manager, for cloud-to-cloud operations. Although recent features were introduced, I have not thoroughly explored them, leading to the adoption of ASR.

The setup process took around one month because I was unfamiliar with the product, necessitating some learning. I had daily calls with the account manager and managed to set it up to Zerto's standards within a month.

The deployment was a one-person job handled by two individuals, with me being the primary one. It was straightforward enough for a single person to manage.

I can give it nine out of ten.

I use HPE Zerto Software for planning disaster recovery and for provisioning the CIs, especially during the exercise phase. We use HPE Zerto Software to protect VMs in our environment. Regarding HPE Zerto Software for disaster recovery, minor challenges exist, but it meets the requirement at approximately 80%. We do not look into HPE Zerto Software for incident downtimes; we only use it for crisis situations. HPE Zerto Software is saving time, especially with RTOs and RPOs being reduced for business-level applications, which has brought down recovery time. Most often, support issues are handled internally; if we require anything, we raise a case, and the operational team follows up.

One advantage of HPE Zerto Software is that it helps in provisioning, becomes easy, much faster, and it also stores historical information. It's good; I won't say it's excellent, but it's meeting some requirements, though for other requirements, I have to rely on other software as well.

There has been a significant impact from using HPE Zerto Software because our provisioning times have reduced drastically. The time to complete the exercises has come down, and we were able to identify and cross-check the RTO and RPO values as well. Using HPE Zerto Software has helped us in reducing the RTO and RPO values.

Overall, it still requires reliance on other software for manual work such as cross-checking and validations, which takes additional time, but the runbook execution is quicker. The 20% challenges relate to reliance on other software for cross-checking the logs. After implementation, the recovery times have improved by approximately 50% to 60%.

The main improvements needed are related to historical data comparison and analytics, and the challenges involve reliance on other software and cross-checking logs. If we could have an end-to-end DR solution in one environment, it would be much easier without relying on multiple tools. The biggest area for improvement in HPE Zerto Software is probably in historical data comparison and enhanced analytics. Future features should reduce reliance on cross-checking logs and other solutions.

I have been using HPE Zerto Software for three years now.

I find HPE Zerto Software relatively stable.

HPE Zerto Software is also scalable.

I haven't checked the technical support part for HPE Zerto Software; I need to talk to my team about it. Most often, support issues are handled internally; if we require anything, we raise a case, and the operational team follows up.

Regarding ease of use and recovery speed, I recall IBM being used previously, but I wasn't there then, so I didn't get a chance to compare HPE Zerto Software with that. I think HPE Zerto Software was better compared to IBM, as the RTOs and RPOs are improving continuously, with the ability to execute exercises becoming quicker.

I haven't looked into options apart from HPE Zerto Software yet, but before the license renewal, we shall start that activity within six months. We typically refer to Gartner's quadrant to identify market leaders for comparison, focusing on the leaders part. There are no specific security examples that made me decide to switch solutions; my main concerns are around costing and compatibility with different environments.

Currently, our team has implemented another solution because HPE Zerto Software couldn't be expanded to that environment, so capability is a restricting factor. A unified solution would be a good bet for future comparisons.

HPE Zerto Software helps in provisioning, making it easy and faster, and it also stores historical information. It's good but not excellent, as it meets some requirements while requiring other software for additional functionalities. I use a solution for disaster recovery in the cloud, but that's specific to the cloud environment. I don't get into the pricing layer for HPE Zerto Software and haven't gathered much information from the vendor. I would rate HPE Zerto Software as 8 out of 10.

My use cases with Zerto are primarily focused on backup and ransomware protection.

There has never been a situation where we've had to use Zerto for DR.

We have improved RPOs and RTOs. Immutability is a huge factor.

The near-synchronous replication is a great feature. It does work, and it's nice to have that. We're backing up all the time. 

We couldn’t see its benefits immediately. A lot of time had to pass, and honestly, we're still working on it.

There is one one-click remediation for ransomware.

We have had some technical difficulties getting a full restore at a file level. One of the problems we were having was to do a full VM recovery to get one file, because we were encountering errors within Zerto. I don't think we have that one fixed yet. However, we do see a huge improvement in our RTO with a full VM recovery.

Zerto is pretty robust. My input would be to have their sales engineers not overpromise and then have the product underdeliver because we were scoped not-appropriately sized target hardware. That hit us hard. We went with Exagrid as our target. Because of incorrect sizing, we didn't get the expected compression, and we ran out of space. We didn't have enough capacity for all of our backups the way we wanted them tiered. It crippled Zerto as well.

I still don't know how I feel about the purchase by HPE. Their support has been top-notch. They've been trying to work with us to get this fixed. However, I didn't like some of the proposals that they made. At one point, they proposed that we pull out Zerto and put in the HPE backup solution.

I have been using Zerto in my career for several years now, and it has played a crucial role in my work.

It's stable.

They're pretty responsive. The quality is there. It looks like we need to go back to the drawing board, which is very unfortunate. I would rate them a nine out of ten. Their support is very good.

Positive

We've used Veeam in conjunction with Dell's Data Domain. We also used the other VDI solution. They're a direct competitor of Veeam. 

I prefer Rubrik over Zerto because of scalability, but the drawback is the cost. Rubrik costs considerably more.

Initial deployment seemed easy. It was a little time-consuming and took a little bit of my sysadmin's time to create all the tiers and do all the configuration, but it was pretty easy. It was smooth.

After the deployment, it does require some maintenance. Because of all the problems that we've had, the maintenance has been fixing or trying to fix what wasn't correct with scoping. We keep running out of space, so our maintenance is that we go in and reconfigure our tiers, and we don't get a 100% backup.

It's fair. My biggest gripe with Zerto is the initial scoping. What we were promised didn't work with what we ended up with. At one point, our Exagrid representative told us that he doesn't know why they scoped it this way, but that's impossible. We can't do what we're expecting to do with just these two Exagrids.

I would rate Zerto a seven out of ten. Their product is solid, but the implementation left a sour taste in my mouth.

While we primarily function as a service provider rather than serving a direct use case, our core focus lies in disaster recovery. We employ a rigorous testing process akin to gear testing and actively engage in recovery operations using Zerto for a diverse clientele, including numerous entities in the financial and government sectors.

Zerto is straightforward to use.

We started to see the full benefits of Zerto one month after the implementation.

The effort on the RPOs has been excellent, greatly enhancing our operations. We have a diverse range of customers who are quite satisfied and express confidence in the timeline for recovery. 

Even Zerto's RTO is low.

Zerto has helped significantly reduce downtime and helped reduce DR testing by over 45 percent.

The most valuable aspect of Zerto is synchronized replication, which is very useful. Additionally, the availability of the virtual machines is quite good. Regarding the recovery point, we achieved at least ten recovery points, and the availability of the virtual machines is particularly notable.

The main issue with Zerto is its user interface, which lacks flexibility and presents a steep learning curve. To improve usability, the UI should be simplified and streamlined, making it more accessible to technical and non-technical users. Additionally, the UI should be better aligned with the platform's various options and features, ensuring a more intuitive and efficient user experience.

I have been using Zerto consistently for almost four and a half years.

Zerto continues to be a stable solution.

Zerto is scalable.

We interacted with technical support many times. They were totally fine and very polite. We receive support around the clock, which is excellent.

Positive

The initial setup of Zerto was straightforward, and their customer service was instrumental in helping us achieve a stable implementation within one month.

A team of five implemented Zerto in-house.

One of Zerto's main disadvantages is its pricing structure, which involves significant upfront costs and limited options for startups with minimal initial funding. Although Zerto offers a comprehensive suite of features, the high cost and lack of flexible payment options, such as pay-as-you-go subscriptions, present a barrier to entry for many businesses. To increase accessibility, Zerto should consider offering lower pricing tiers or more flexible subscription models tailored to startups' needs.

We evaluated a lot of different solutions.

There are some disadvantages; therefore, I rate Zerto eight out of ten. 

We are not a partner, just a customer, but we are trying to collaborate with them as a reseller within one year.

No maintenance has been required as of yet.

We use HPE Zerto Software for disaster recovery, resiliency, and peace of mind.

It provides peace of mind, it allows us to feel confident knowing that the data protection platform is in-place and allows for rapid recovery in the event of data integrity failures, or platform disruptions.

The contextual help and simulation of HPE Zerto Software are the most valuable features. HPE Zerto Software's continuous data protection or CDP is critical for our organization because it allows us to recover within seconds to minutes, and the journal allows us to pick a point-in-time recovery. The journal allows us to recover from a point in time before an event occurred.

I cannot think of any ways HPE Zerto Software needs improvement, as I have used it at a previous company as well, and it is a reputably reliable platform.

I have been using HPE Zerto Software for over several years.

I have not experienced any downtime, crashes, or performance issues with HPE Zerto Software; it is a reliable platform and it is very well-engineered.

HPE Zerto Software scales with the growing needs of our organization.

HPE Zerto Software's customer service and technical support have been fantastic.

Positive

We used Veeam as our previous solution and we switched to HPE Zerto Software to ensure that we had a mutable backup, as well as synchronous replication.

I don't perform setup and initial configuration, another team does that.

That amount of downtime would cost our organization in the millions.

I don't operate in this vein of the business.

Veeam, Rubrik, ASR.

HPE Zerto Software's recovery speed is very fast and reliable compared to the disaster recovery solution we used before. I would rate HPE Zerto Software overall as a ten; it is a fantastic product.

We use it in our data center. We have two data centers, one in Baton Rouge and one in Las Vegas, and we use it for replication. It is all used in the data center.

We did not have replication previously. Once we got Zerto, we started seeing everything backed up and replicated, and we saw its benefits pretty early. Over the years, we have kept renewing Zerto because it seems to get better. There have not been any issues with it.

Near-synchronous replication works very well. We use pretty big storage with them and never had a problem. If it is close to going over, we always get an email, and it is easy to keep up with all that, which is pretty important here at Credit Union. I have nothing but positive to say about Zerto.

Zerto is easy to use. When we first started using it, we used the emails they sent at the end of the night to see everything was fine. About five years ago, they got their own portal. Since then, we have been able to see everything in real-time. It has been super easy. I automatically get notifications on my phone or email. That has been a real high point for me with them.

We have several VMs, and Zerto has been a part of the protection plan for them.

Knowing what is going on in real-time has helped with breaches and things like that. Recently, there have been no issues. Luckily, over the last year or two, we have not had any security issues. Zerto and VMware are what we count on in our data center. As long as the data center is up and running safely, we are good here at the branch.

We run reports on XDR and get an idea of anything that has been going on. Luckily, we have been safe for the last year or two, but in 2022, there was an issue. Zerto was right on it, and we were able to get it cleaned up. Zerto has definitely helped in the ransomware aspect.

The portal is a valuable feature. I am here in Baton Rouge, and I can get into the Vegas data center and see real-time replication on the portal. The portal has been upgraded over the past several years, and it is probably the most helpful part of it.

I always get some blowback about the cost. It does not seem too bad to me. We had to upgrade to a premium subscription to get some other features. Maybe a one-size-fits-all option would be better. 

I have used Zerto for eight to ten years.

I have not experienced any stability issues. We are a heavy usage bank, and it has always been steady for us. I do not have anything bad to say about that.

Scalability has been good too. We started with the one in Baton Rouge and added the one in Vegas about five years ago. It was very easy to connect them and get them mirroring each other. Scalability has been good for us.

When my staff member went to Vegas, there were some issues with logging into the device. He called the tech line and was able to talk to someone. We have had luck getting in touch with those guys. Their customer service deserves a good score, at least an eight out of ten.

Positive

At the previous bank, it was a big Cisco shop, but I have been here for almost ten years, and we have had Zerto for that long. Zerto is what I am used to.

I did not personally do the initial setup. A guy who works for me went to Vegas, called it in, and got it set up pretty well. I do not go to Vegas much, but I have been to Baton Rouge. I have tested it and played with it, and every time I have done that, it seems easy to use. My network administrator has never complained about any difficulty. For the most part, it is easy. They have a good tech support line, and if we have any trouble, they are easy to get in touch with. We are happy with that.

We have a maintenance contract with them, but I did not have to use it except for one instance a few years ago when we thought that we were going to get ransomware. We had maintenance on that. The good thing is that it is a part of the renewal. It is safe to have it, but luckily, we have not had to use it over the last few years.

Price-wise, it works fine for me, but my budgetary team is always looking for ways to cut costs, and it seems like they first look at the data center and the IT side to find savings.

Take advantage of the maintenance plan; even if it is not required, it is definitely worth getting. The techs there are really good. There are local Zerto reps who come around. Use the tech support when needed because they are always very good. 

I would rate Zerto a nine out of ten.