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.
"There is only one feature, and that is the backup."
"The best aspect of the solution is its backup functionality."
"I like that it's a stable solution and their support is good. I think Microsoft's commercial force is superior."
"When it comes to Azure Backup, the advantage is that it's native and it's very easy to configure. We don't require a separate tool or manage something on a separate server. At the backend, it's managed by Microsoft itself, and we don't need to manage it."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"The deployment process is quite easy in Azure."
"The scalability has been good."
"It is a stable solution...The product is worth the money you pay for it."
"The features that we like the most are the Backup Copy and Active Directory Integration. They have helped us to save a lot of time since we do not have to make the backup copies “by hand”."
"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."
"It is affordable."
"Backup jobs are running smoothly every day with job reports sent to email after they finish each job. That gives us peace of mind."
"The price is much lower than competitors that do the same function."
"This is a user-friendly solution that has a lot of certifications and documentation for the Microsoft Hyper-V infrastructure."
"The solution is stable; there is no need to retry any sort of jobs in daily operations."
"It has saved us numerous times from power outages and server failure."
"I would like to see better pricing."
"The solution is still in its infancy; it's not a mature product yet."
"The user interface is a little bit confusing and it could be better."
"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."
"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."
"It would be beneficial to receive alert messages if something isn't configured correctly, for instance, if service principal names are missing, a message could prompt you to set them up."
"The product could improve its performance."
"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."
"The backup speed needs improvement."
"They need to add a failover feature to the Essential Pro license in case the environment is a simple virtual environment and the client does not need to upgrade."
"The only thing we have encountered that we would like to see improved in the future are error messages. They could be more detailed and helpful, without the need to send logs to support. Failing that, the part of the log related to the error could be displayed alongside the error message, so I can investigate the error without looking through all of those logs that I'm able to download."
"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."
"An additional feature that would be appreciated is disaster recovery automation."
"We'd like to see more cooperation with Synology. It can be enhanced to get updates published faster to Synology's store."
"An improvement would be to give us more control over the email alerts, with different emails going to different addresses based on a set of rules."
"Updating VM Tools on a replicated VM could be better."
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.
