We compared Rubrik and Azure Backup based on user reviews in five categories. We reviewed all of the data and you can find the conclusion below.
Features: Rubrik is praised for its automated policy enforcement and efficient ransomware detection. 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. Rubrik could expand compatibility with open-source databases, improve documentation, and strengthen its ability to back up remote sites. Azure Backup needs to improve its backup and file-level restoration procedure.
Service and Support: Rubrik customers appreciate the support team's expertise and fast response. Azure's customer service is generally considered helpful and proactive, but a few users have reported longer wait times and slow issue resolution.
Ease of Deployment: Rubrik's setup is simple, and users say the support team was available to assist as needed. Azure Backup's setup is easy, quick, and can be completed with minimal user involvement.
Pricing: Some users find Rubrik's pricing expensive, but many say it’s justified by its encryption and security features. Rubrik's license includes both software and hardware without any additional costs. 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.
ROI: Rubrik provides peace of mind and some cost savings, but users say that quantifying the ROI is difficult. Azure Backup offers a solid return on investment with its affordable pricing and low initial costs, particularly when upgrading solutions.
Comparison Results: Users like Rubrik’s advanced ransomware features, excellent support, and automated policy enforcement. However, some had issues with its remote backup abilities and high price tag. 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.
"The product is very reliable and easy to use."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"With a couple of buttons, we can configure a VM for a backup and use the wall service, the storage wall service, pretty seamlessly."
"Azure Backup is easy to configure and restore."
"The MARS agent makes it easy to use."
"The daily backups have become easier since we no longer need to handle large backups. The use of Azure Backup as a service has proven reliable and simplified our daily operations. Previously, we relied on LTO backups for data retention, but after migrating to the cloud and adopting Azure Backup, the delivery process has become smoother."
"This solution is easy to configure and restore. It is a Microsoft product so is easily compatible with other solutions."
"This solution allows me to restore either the VM or the data, depending on what is needed."
"Replaces legacy tapes and disk backups which are unreliable, expensive and space consuming."
"The most valuable feature is the archive to cloud location and the automation around the PowerShell script. There are also reports and dashboards."
"The web interface is user-friendly, clean, and it provides a good summary of what you're protecting at a glance."
"The ease of use is the most valuable feature. It is a very simple system compared to just about any other back up technology. It is extremely easy to use and very versatile."
"The main benefit is that we are secured in terms of workloads. We know that if we need to restore any VMs, or even any files inside a VM, that we will succeed 100 percent. This means that we don't need to spend much time administering the backup environment because we know it is self-healing and efficient. So, we are spending that time on something else, which is always a plus."
"Time dedicated to backup was drastically reduced."
"The archiving, off-of-box, is awesome. It lets you put your data where you want it and gives you the peace of mind of having more than one copy of it. And it's smart about the way that it does the archiving. It doesn't just copy one-for-one. It does all of its processing of the deduplication and compression before it sends it off to the archive, which helps with our cloud costs."
"Automation functions, image based backup, and the ability to instantly recover anything from files to databases."
"It doesn't have the option to have a backup from the database. It has backup for the files, folders, and backup only the whole virtual machine. But if I need to do a backup from the Oracle database, from an Exchange server or from SharePoint, this ability isn't there. There is no application backup."
"Azure Backup could improve by offering better integration for Oracle databases and enhancing features like granular restore and backup compliance capabilities."
"I would like to see better integration with more products, and more services."
"The product could improve its performance."
"I would like to see better pricing."
"It can be further improved by continuously meeting its compliance requirements."
"To make it a ten, it should have the ability to extend the retention and to perform a copy of the data outside of the subscription - with no additional costs."
"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."
"If I could take a snapshot from a physical and be able to stand it up as a virtual immediately without the need to rebuild an entire system and restoring files, that would be HUGE."
"With Windows, it is difficult to configure Oracle Database."
"Its cost is high."
"Its reporting can be improved. Sometimes, I need to create reports to know whether something is available or not, how much frontend data is being protected, etc. Rubrik gives a lot of things in the report, which can be confusing. It isn't very easy to get reports. It shows all the backup, index, replication, and everything else in one report. So, I have to export, filter, and then do the calculations."
"I hope to see enhancements in areas like data governance and the incorporation of new features in future updates."
"User interface could be improved."
"The licensing cost is quite high. That is something that needs to be worked out, because so many times it happens that the team does not have the budget or there are other issues at that time. Cost has become an important factor in deciding whether to continue with the Rubrik solution."
"I would like to see more information on encryption with the next release."
Azure Backup is ranked 9th in Backup and Recovery with 51 reviews while Rubrik is ranked 4th in Backup and Recovery with 86 reviews. Azure Backup is rated 7.8, while Rubrik is rated 9.2. 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 Rubrik writes "Automates the backup and recovery process, reducing manual human errors and global search allows for granular recoveries". Azure Backup is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Commvault Cloud, Veritas NetBackup, Acronis Cyber Protect and Cohesity DataProtect, whereas Rubrik is most compared with Veeam Backup & Replication, Cohesity DataProtect, Commvault Cloud, Dell PowerProtect DD (Data Domain) and Veritas NetBackup. See our Azure Backup vs. Rubrik 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.