Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo

Top 10 IBM Cloud Object Storage Alternatives

Vendor: IBM
4.1 out of 5
Leave a review

Top IBM Cloud Object Storage Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to IBM Cloud Object Storage based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Red Hat Ceph Storage, MinIO, and Dell PowerScale (Isilon). The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.

IBM Cloud Object Storage surpasses its competitors by offering seamless scalability, advanced security features, and reliable performance, empowering businesses with efficient data management and cost-effective storage solutions tailored to their needs.

IBM Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with IBM, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Red Hat Ceph Storage
4.1 out of 5
Red Hat Ceph Storage offers a software-defined, open-source approach with cost-effective options for scalability and integration. In comparison, IBM Cloud Object Storage provides enhanced security features and integration with IBM's services, appealing to those needing managed services and comprehensive support.
Download IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Red Hat Ceph Storage Report
Red Hat Ceph Storage offers flexible setup costs, while IBM Cloud Object Storage typically involves lower initial expenditures. Red Hat Ceph Storage is known for scalability, whereas IBM Cloud Object Storage focuses on cost efficiency.
View comparison
Pricing
Red Hat Ceph Storage offers flexible setup costs, while IBM Cloud Object Storage typically involves lower initial expenditures. Red Hat Ceph Storage is known for scalability, whereas IBM Cloud Object Storage focuses on cost efficiency.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
MinIO
4.0 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
MinIO
4.0 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage offers scalable solutions and strong data protection with extensive support. In comparison, MinIO provides open-source flexibility and high-performance storage with community backing. Businesses may choose IBM for ease and support, while MinIO suits those valuing flexibility and cost-efficiency.
Download IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. MinIO Report
IBM Cloud Object Storage involves a higher initial setup cost, while MinIO offers a more budget-friendly setup option with minimal financial commitment required.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Cloud Object Storage involves a higher initial setup cost, while MinIO offers a more budget-friendly setup option with minimal financial commitment required.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Dell PowerScale (Isilon)
4.4 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage offers flexible, scalable storage ideal for efficient data management. In comparison, Dell PowerScale provides superior data analytics and seamless infrastructure integration, appealing to those with complex IT needs. IBM's cost-effectiveness contrasts Dell's higher ROI driven by performance and integration benefits.
Download Dell PowerScale (Isilon) vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage Report
IBM Cloud Object Storage requires minimal setup costs, offering a more budget-friendly initial investment, whereas Dell PowerScale (Isilon) often involves higher initial expenses, reflecting its robust infrastructure capabilities.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Cloud Object Storage requires minimal setup costs, offering a more budget-friendly initial investment, whereas Dell PowerScale (Isilon) often involves higher initial expenses, reflecting its robust infrastructure capabilities.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Dell ObjectScale
4.1 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Dell ObjectScale
4.1 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage offers competitive pricing and multi-cloud integration, making it ideal for budget-conscious businesses. In comparison, Dell ObjectScale provides advanced data management features and real-time analytics, appealing to organizations seeking flexibility and long-term value despite higher initial costs.
Download Dell ObjectScale vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage Report
IBM Cloud Object Storage has a straightforward initial setup with potentially lower costs, while Dell ObjectScale's setup can be more complex and costly. These differences highlight varying approaches and cost implications for users.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Cloud Object Storage has a straightforward initial setup with potentially lower costs, while Dell ObjectScale's setup can be more complex and costly. These differences highlight varying approaches and cost implications for users.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
VAST Data
5.0 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
VAST Data
5.0 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage provides scalable, secure storage that easily integrates with IBM services. In comparison, VAST Data's advanced features, superior speed, and durability offer unmatched performance, making it ideal for data-intensive tasks. A buyer might choose IBM for cost-effectiveness or VAST for high returns.
Download IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. VAST Data Report
IBM Cloud Object Storage has competitive setup costs, while VAST Data presents a higher initial investment. Notably, IBM's entry expense is significantly lower in comparison, making it more accessible for budget-conscious enterprises.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Cloud Object Storage has competitive setup costs, while VAST Data presents a higher initial investment. Notably, IBM's entry expense is significantly lower in comparison, making it more accessible for budget-conscious enterprises.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS)
4.4 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage offers cost-efficient data handling with seamless integration possibilities, ideal for large unstructured data. In comparison, Nutanix Unified Storage provides advanced data management and unified control, suitable for enterprises needing versatile, high-performing storage with long-term value.
Download IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) Report
IBM Cloud Object Storage is noted for its relatively low setup costs, whereas Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) involves higher initial expenses. This pricing distinction highlights IBM's cost-effective entry point compared to the more substantial investment required for Nutanix setup.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Cloud Object Storage is noted for its relatively low setup costs, whereas Nutanix Unified Storage (NUS) involves higher initial expenses. This pricing distinction highlights IBM's cost-effective entry point compared to the more substantial investment required for Nutanix setup.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
NetApp StorageGRID
4.2 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
NetApp StorageGRID
4.2 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage excels in competitive pricing and customer support, providing scalable and flexible data management. In comparison, NetApp StorageGRID offers advanced lifecycle management and data policy enforcement, appealing to users valuing integration and comprehensive features over cost considerations.
Download IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. NetApp StorageGRID Report
IBM Cloud Object Storage offers lower setup costs compared to NetApp StorageGRID, which has a more comprehensive initial investment. This difference affects budget allocations for new storage implementations.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Cloud Object Storage offers lower setup costs compared to NetApp StorageGRID, which has a more comprehensive initial investment. This difference affects budget allocations for new storage implementations.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Scality RING
4.1 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Scality RING
4.1 out of 5
Scality RING offers flexible deployment options and a cost-effective pricing model attractive to budget-conscious tech buyers. In comparison, IBM Cloud Object Storage appeals to enterprises seeking advanced features and scalability, providing long-term value despite higher initial costs.
Download IBM Cloud Object Storage vs. Scality RING Report
Scality RING has higher setup costs but offers more extensive customization options, while IBM Cloud Object Storage presents lower initial costs with quicker deployment capabilities.
View comparison
Pricing
Scality RING has higher setup costs but offers more extensive customization options, while IBM Cloud Object Storage presents lower initial costs with quicker deployment capabilities.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Cloudian HyperStore
4.1 out of 5
Cloudian HyperStore appeals with cost-effective scalability and integration. In comparison, IBM Cloud Object Storage delivers advanced analytics and AI for enhanced security. Cloudian's customer service is personalized, while IBM offers extensive support. Cloudian offers competitive pricing, contrasting with IBM's long-term value proposition.
Download Cloudian HyperStore vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage Report
Cloudian HyperStore presents a lower setup cost, making it appealing for cost-conscious users, while IBM Cloud Object Storage emphasizes a more comprehensive suite of features, reflected in its higher initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Cloudian HyperStore presents a lower setup cost, making it appealing for cost-conscious users, while IBM Cloud Object Storage emphasizes a more comprehensive suite of features, reflected in its higher initial investment.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Scality ARTESCA
1 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Scality ARTESCA
1 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage appeals to enterprises seeking scalability and integration within IBM's ecosystem. In comparison, Scality ARTESCA attracts users needing efficient edge computing with advanced data management. IBM’s cost-effectiveness contrasts with Scality’s advantage in agile edge deployment and innovative features.
IBM Cloud Object Storage involves a moderate setup cost, while Scality ARTESCA is known for its low initial setup expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Cloud Object Storage involves a moderate setup cost, while Scality ARTESCA is known for its low initial setup expenses.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Hitachi Content Platform
4.2 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage is favored for its integration with AI and strong security features. In comparison, Hitachi Content Platform excels in advanced data management and scalability. While IBM's pricing is flexible, Hitachi may yield better long-term ROI despite higher initial costs.
Download Hitachi Content Platform vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage Report
IBM Cloud Object Storage's setup cost is typically lower, making it attractive for budget-conscious users. In contrast, Hitachi Content Platform often involves a higher initial investment, which some users find justified by its advanced features.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Cloud Object Storage's setup cost is typically lower, making it attractive for budget-conscious users. In contrast, Hitachi Content Platform often involves a higher initial investment, which some users find justified by its advanced features.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
Huawei FusionStorage
3.8 out of 5
IBM Cloud Object Storage attracts tech buyers with scalability, security, and cost-effectiveness. In comparison, Huawei FusionStorage intrigues those seeking advanced integration and performance despite higher costs. IBM's flexibility and support entice budget-conscious users, while Huawei's features appeal to innovation-focused businesses.
Download Huawei FusionStorage vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage Report
IBM Cloud Object Storage setup involves standard integration costs with flexibility, while Huawei FusionStorage requires a higher initial investment due to its complex deployment.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Cloud Object Storage setup involves standard integration costs with flexibility, while Huawei FusionStorage requires a higher initial investment due to its complex deployment.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
HPE File Storage and Object Storage
4.5 out of 5
HPE File Storage and Object Storage excel in scalability and data availability, appealing to cost-conscious businesses. In comparison, IBM Cloud Object Storage enhances advanced data retrieval and security, suitable for entities needing superior features and willing to invest for long-term returns.
Download HPE File Storage and Object Storage vs. IBM Cloud Object Storage Report
HPE File Storage and Object Storage have a straightforward setup process with predictable costs, while IBM Cloud Object Storage may involve more variable setup expenses, potentially affecting budgeting and deployment considerations.
View comparison
Pricing
HPE File Storage and Object Storage have a straightforward setup process with predictable costs, while IBM Cloud Object Storage may involve more variable setup expenses, potentially affecting budgeting and deployment considerations.
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
IBM Cloud Object Storage Logo
HGST ActiveScale
1 out of 5

Big Data insights enable Fast Data applications. Your data can generate value when it’s aggregated, analyzed, and applied to business decisions. We live for long-term data preservation, and our ActiveScale object storage systems are changing the economics of data. The ActiveScale system architecture is designed for petabyte-scale datasets, facilitates storing data forever, and takes full advantage of our component-to-system vertical innovation.

View comparison

Related categories

File and Object Storage
Software Defined Storage (SDS)
NAS