We compared Azure Backup and Nakivo based on user reviews in five categories. We reviewed all of the data and you can find the conclusion below.
Features: Azure Backup is commended for its scalability, comprehensive security options, and non-disruptive backup process. Users also like its seamless integration with various Azure services. Nakivo is praised for its offsite backup to Synology NAS and seamless cloud integration. Azure Backup needs to improve its backup and file-level restoration procedure. Nakivo could benefit from improvements in its remote upgrade capabilities, SNMP features, and application backup.
Service and Support: Azure's customer service is generally considered helpful and proactive, but a few users have reported longer wait times and slow issue resolution. Nakivo's support is praised for being quick, considerate, and attentive.
Ease of Deployment: Azure Backup's setup is easy, quick, and can be completed with minimal user involvement. Nakivo's setup was described as straightforward. A few users said the deployment was somewhat complex but not excessively difficult.
Pricing: Azure Backup is a cloud-based solution, so its pricing depends on factors like storage and data consumption. Azure offers competitive pricing and is considered more cost effective than many competing solutions. Nakivo offers lower licensing costs and a flexible pricing structure. Nakivo provides cost-efficient backups at a competitive price and even offers a free license for one year for up to five VMs.
ROI: Azure Backup offers a solid return on investment with its affordable pricing and low initial costs, particularly when upgrading solutions. Nakivo ensures a favorable return on investment with a reasonable total cost of ownership and reduced testing expenditures.
Comparison Results: Azure Backup is an affordable, scalable solution that features an effortless deployment and native integration with Azure services. While reviews of Azure Backup’s features were generally positive, some users reported unsatisfactory experiences with Azure support. Nakivo is a powerful, cost-effective solution that seamlessly integrates with the cloud, but it could use some enhancements in its SNMP features and remote upgrading functionality.
"It's easy to deploy."
"Setting up Azure Backup is straightforward and the total deployment time was about a month."
"I like the product's restoration cases."
"One of the most valuable features is security and connectivity to the data."
"You can select the tiering for your backup and manage your cost."
"The storage backup is very efficient."
"I have no issues with the stability at all. So I don't necessarily care about the stability of the product. I look more at whether or not can I recover. And I haven't had a failed recovery yet. I've got no failed recoveries of all my years."
"We are happy with this product and have not found any issues while using it."
"Nakivo's backup and replication product has allowed us to implement a disaster recovery solution with a target repository in the cloud."
"The fact that it works with Synology is a big valuable point. Also, that we can check the functionality of a backup so easily. Cloud integration is valuable because the ability to not only backup locally, but to the cloud, has been a great addition to the already fantastic product. We can save so much time with Nakivo and are very happy that we found it and loved to use it for our solutions."
"The product is easy to manage for any IT person who is new to backup, recovery, and replication."
"The most important feature besides the easy management of the different backup jobs is the automated e-mail notification functionality."
"You can have it setup and running within a few minutes."
"Before using Nakivo Backup & Replication, all our data backup processes took a long time and did not optimize the disk space reserved for backup. With the introduction of Nakivo Backup & Replication, saving times have been reduced by almost half (thanks to the use of several simultaneous transporters) and the space occupied has also had a very important reduction."
"The automatic backup and replication features are invaluable, saving us time and resources by automating routine backup tasks and ensuring data protection without manual intervention."
"It is easy to manage all of the individual backup jobs, check the status every day, and it can even send an email to keep us informed."
"On-prem can be complex to set up but the cloud is simple."
"The user interface is a little bit confusing and it could be better."
"Technical support can be slow to respond at times."
"In Avamar, the file-based restores are very quick and fast, whereas, in Azure Backup, VM restore is super easy, but if I have to do a file or a folder restore, I have to mount the entire VM image. I have to wait for some time for it to be mounted, and then I have to go inside and then check the file and copy it somewhere. It's a bit of a manual process, whereas in Avamar, you can directly select a file and folder, and it'll recover with whatever permissions you want."
"I once tried restoring a Linux environment, and the size of the Linux VM or the data disk was really huge. It took a really long time to restore the environment and send the data from the storage to the disk. It took around 25 to 30 minutes, which was much longer than I anticipated. They can improve the duration of such restore operations. In the next release, it would also be good if they could reduce the duration for transferring the data from their storage to the actual storage while creating a virtual machine. They can reduce the duration or increase the data transfer rate."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved."
"The product must improve on a database level."
"The support for Office365 backup is atrocious and is something that has to be improved."
"They need a better knowledge base with more information about support issues."
"It would be helpful to be able to have a custom footprint so that only the required features are installed."
"One of the things I liked least about this software is when an update was pushed to one of the servers we had, somehow we didn't receive the update and needed some quick troubleshooting."
"The upgrade process is a bit dated and could use some changes."
"I need no more valuable features for backs-up. I have not yet tried the latest release, however, I have all the features that I need."
"It would be good if I could have a remote upgrade of our Synology Transporters, but the manual upgrade is easy and no problem at all."
"I would like to see some additional models in the next release to make backups more functional."
"At the moment I am pleased with what Nakivo does but I would like more reporting functions and if possible, integration with my RMM system."
Azure Backup is ranked 9th in Backup and Recovery with 51 reviews while NAKIVO Backup & Replication is ranked 6th in Backup and Recovery with 84 reviews. Azure Backup is rated 7.8, while NAKIVO Backup & Replication is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Azure Backup writes "Straightforward to set up and manage and allows us to monitor all backups in one place". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NAKIVO Backup & Replication writes "Good deduplication, easy to configure, and offers a free version". Azure Backup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Rubrik, Commvault Cloud, Acronis Cyber Protect and Veritas NetBackup, whereas NAKIVO Backup & Replication is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Hornetsecurity Altaro VM Backup, Acronis Cyber Protect, Rubrik and Zerto. See our Azure Backup vs. NAKIVO Backup & Replication report.
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.