We use Zerto for data and disaster recovery replication.

From time to time, we have to go look at the DR environment. Every time we go there, Zerto application always works. That's a benefit.

Zerto's near-synchronous replication works. The value for our business case is okay.

Zerto's near-synchronous replication is important for healthcare, but not as much because we have time to recover data.

Zerto helped protect VMs in our environment, just for the DR.

Our RPOs are not very aggressive. So, Zerto works just fine for us.

It's very easy to set up. Up until now, even with an old version, it always worked fine.

There is room for improvement in the upgrades. We are planning an upgrade now, and it seems that it's not straightforward.

In future releases, I look forward to the security feature.

We have been using Zerto for more than five years.

Stability is very good. We have complaints about stability.

We haven't had issues with scalability. When we add VMs, we just buy additional licenses.

The customer service and support are very good. Every time we have problems, they're ready to help us.

They're always available and very knowledgeable.

They need to be on-site. That would make them a ten on ten.

We have only used Zerto.

It was very easy to deploy. There wasn't a lot of configuration needed to get the syncing working.

It is an on-premises deployment.

We used HPE Services. Our experience with them was very good.

We have seen ROI. Several times, we needed to recover, and we were able to go to Zerto.

The pricing, setup, cost, and licensing are comparable to other solutions. Zerto is not more cost-effective.

We looked at Veeam. They're very similar. We already had the skills for Zerto, so we decided to stay with it.

We decided to stay because we have not had any problems with it, and moving to another solution doesn't make sense for us.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. The version we have doesn't have security yet, so maybe the next version will get a ten.

We use the solution for running demos for HPE partners and customers, regarding disaster recovery and backup.

Although our primary use case is to show demos to partners and customers, we think it's really valuable.

The most valuable features are disaster recovery and that the RTO takes less than ten seconds. It's a reallypotent tool.

The near-synchronous replication is really good and an advantage for customers. This feature is really important because we can show it to customers and partners, helping recovering from ransomware, and does provide huge value.

You can protect your VMs in the environment. It depends on the network and environment, but the RTO takes around 7-8 seconds. When you compare Zerto to other solutions in the market, it's very powerful.

Also, the ease of use and speed of recovery are wonderful.

I'm happy with the solution, but I would like Zerto to support other hypervisors too

And the price could be cheaper, but it is reasonable.

I have been using Zerto for four years.

It's very stable.

The scalability is really good.

We have used SRM from VMware and RapidDR from Simplivity. In comparison to those products, Zerto is really simple to use and helpful.

We are constantly trying new products. Zerto has the lowest RTO, you can recover a lot more quickly than using other solutions.

The initial setup is very easy.

We did the implementation ourselves.

Our clients think it's quite expensive but I advise them to consider all of Zerto's features.

You need to start with 25 VMs, which sometimes is too much for SMB clients in some countries. It would be better if they had the option to start with a license for less VMs, like 5 or 10.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten because of the low RTOs, the ease of use, and how helpful it is for clients.

We use it for continuous data protection on our mission-critical clinical systems. I work for a hospital. We use it to prevent ransomware, malware, or basic recovery for things like our patient data and imaging system. At one point, we used to do recovery once a day. With Zerto, our recovery objective right now is in six seconds.

We had a database failure one night at around 11 o'clock, and it had probably been about 23 hours since it had a hard backup. With Zerto, we brought it up in my DR site within ten minutes, and it controlled all of the hospital's registration features. Without that system, we can't even ingest patients into our system. So we brought up that database within ten minutes, got it back in line, and continued operations.

The live test failover is the most valuable feature because it allows me to validate that my data is protected in the event of a failure.

The near-synchronous replication Zerto provides is awesome. This feature is very important, especially because in today's age of ransomware and everything is so data-centric in a hospital, I need to be able to identify the point in time of infection and recover to the most up-to-date available point in time that I can without having to lose patient data. At one point, we used to do a 24-hour recovery. but in today's day and age, you can't lose a day's worth of data.

We use Zerto to protect our VMs in our environment. It improved our RPOs because before we had 24-hour RPO, and now I'm within ten minutes.

Zerto's speed of recovery is fast compared to other solutions. We use Zerto and Veeam. Zerto already has the disks, which must be signed into and presented. There's a lot of rescanning involved, but Azure builds the VM, attaches the disks, and powers it up. We're leveraging RTO in under ten minutes.

The price could be improved. It's pretty expensive per server, but in the long run, it's well worth the level of protection it provides.

I have been using Zerto since 2023.

Stability is very good.

Scalability is excellent.

Support is very good.

We used Veeam, which didn't offer any CDP. We use Zerto primarily for continuous protection.

The initial setup was easy. We had a professional services engagement when we bought our first pack of licenses. They came in and worked with us. We had monthly and weekly meetings for three months to set up everything.

We do not use disaster recovery in the cloud. We have an actual on-prem DR site. We have a multisite Zerto environment that I can bring up in multiple locations, but we do primarily on-prem recovery.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten for its ease of use, functionality, and multi-tenant support with ransomware detection.

I use it for yearly disaster recovery testing.

The main benefit we see from Zerto is that it helps to meet our disaster recovery objectives.

Zerto's near-synchronous replication is important and impressive.

Zerto helps protect VMs in our environment and has improved all over RPO.

The speed of recovery with Zerto is extremely fast. We're able to perform disaster recovery testing on dozens of VMs within an hour or even half an hour.

I like its fast recovery, fast RPO and RTO, ease of use, easy interface, ease of deployment, and that it's always available.

I would like for Zerto to improve reporting, provide more data on individual VMs and their performance, and maybe expand into backup with the ability to scan for malware or offline scanning.

I have been using Zerto for over seven years.

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

The customer service and support are excellent.

We previously used Commvault. It used a lot of scripting and configuration to make disaster recovery happen, and it was slow, with a low RPO.

We haven't tried disaster recovery in the cloud rather than in a physical data center. We only use on-premises recovery.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing was straightforward.

We previously used or evaluated other backup and disaster recovery solutions.

We compared Veeam and Commvault against Zerto.

We chose Zerto because of its performance and ease of use.

Overall, I would rate it an eight out of ten because there's always room for improvement.

We're using Zerto to move services between our on-premises data centers and Azure environment.

Zerto has really helped us streamline migrations to new hardware or other data centers.

We use the solution to move servers and VMs between data centers. Thankfully, we don't have to use it a lot for DR.

I love Zerto's near-synchronous replication. It's better than other applications that we tried. This near-synchronous replication is super important to our organization because we don't want to lose any data.

We're now trying to do disaster recovery (DR) in the cloud with Zerto. We haven't had any real use cases, but we're piloting it. It's pretty important to our organization to have DR in the cloud because we're in a very rural area where we don't have a lot of redundancy. So, it's important to have the scalability of Azure where we don't have it.

We use Zerto to help protect VMs in our environment, which is our primary use case. Our RPOs are pretty short. We can roll over a data center in 30 to 60 minutes if we have to. It's pretty quick, and we could turn everything around.

We looked at VMware's SRM but decided not to go with it.

We chose to use Zerto because the RTOs and RPOs were a lot faster with it.

Compared to other solutions, Zerto is really easy to use, and its interface is really nice. It's really easy to set up the replication groups in Zerto.

We're struggling a little bit now with the appliance migration with version ten.

Zerto could make some small improvements with some of the newer features. You can back up VMs but can't back up individual objects, like email objects, which could be improved.

I have been using Zerto for about seven years.

The solution's stability is very good. We haven't had any stability issues with Zerto.

Zerto can go bigger than our environment, so I think it has good enough scalability.

The solution's technical support is pretty good. Since we haven't had a lot of issues with the tool, we don't really use the support much. The cases we've opened have been resolved quickly by the support team. The support team seems knowledgeable and quick.

I rate the solution's technical support an eight or nine out of ten.

We have Zerto deployed in our on-premises data centers and for Azure VMware and Azure native so that we can switch between them. The solution's deployment is really easy. You just deploy the main tool and then tie it into your virtual environments.

Zerto's pricing was not that bad. I think it's gone up since we went live and added the cloud options now that we are an enterprise. The solution is expensive, but it's worth the price.

We use both public and private clouds to deploy the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten.

We use the solution for a couple of functions. One is cyber recovery, and the other is backing up all our infrastructure with the server.

The most valuable feature is the recovery. For example, in our financial operations, we eliminated two other vendors and reduced our costs.

Having DR in the cloud is crucial for us. We use it as a third copy to ensure stability and protection against cyber-attacks, giving us a clean copy in the cloud. This helps protect our VMs, and our RPOs are close to zero.

The recovery speed is much faster and less complicated than it was.

The knowledge base could be improved. Sometimes, it's finicky, especially when moving storage around. We've had to redo entire processes, which was time-consuming and resulted in data loss. This has happened multiple times, and despite following support steps and contacting support, we often had to resolve issues on our own.

I have been working with the product for a year.

The solution can scale well if you have the needed storage.

We received conflicting answers and resolutions to the same question depending on who we spoke to. Despite this, Zerto is stable. One of the key challenges we faced was during infrastructure moves, such as moving data or personnel. In these cases, we often had to rebuild our VPGs.

We used Site Recovery Manager for VM replication and Veeam for backups. Zerto outperformed these products.

Deploying the solution involved a learning curve. The knowledge base had conflicting data compared to other vendors.

HPE helped us with the deployment. Our overall experience with them was good. They answered our questions during virtual sessions. However, we encountered some customer service issues, as the resolution could vary depending on who we spoke to.

We have seen ROI by eliminating vendors and thereby saving costs.

Zerto's pricing is comparable. Each product has its ups and downs.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

We've used Zerto for file recovery and entire VM recovery.

Having a fast recovery time for both of our use cases is invaluable to the business.

The ability to form our backups automatically during the day has saved us, more than a few times.

My impression of Zerto’s near-synchronous replication is very positive. It gets the job done.

Near-synchronous replication is very important for our organization who use a lot of different versions of files across environments and database changes. It's what we do every day and having the functionality of near-instant recovery on entire virtual machines and files is a blessing.

We use Zerto to protect our VMs in our environment. We do daily backups with a different backup management software and having the ability to recover data in under ten seconds has been helpful.

Speed of recovery has been very effective in getting our information back as fast as we're able to get it. The daily backup solution that we use alternatively only allows a single backup versus having continuous backup replication with Zerto, it's a no-brainer.

I would like to have more granular notifications for jobs and workloads within the applying case application.

We have been using Zerto for around sixteen months.

It's pretty stable. The company itself has been around long enough to know they're not going anywhere. The number of clients that use them on a day-to-day basis speaks for itself.

For our environment, scalability does a great job with how it is. It can handle scaling.

Zerto technical support is some of the best around. I know when I reach out to them over the phone or via email, they are there quickly and offer great support.

I would rate them a ten out of ten. Every time I have to call them, they get something ready, very fast, and our issues are resolved quickly.

We still use Veeam.

We chose Zerto because when we started our path with GreenLake, we began looking into other backup utilities and Zerto was highly recommended. After we saw a product demo, we were sold. The demo sold itself very well.

Once the VPG is configured, the automation for backups happens on its own. There's nothing else to do. You can monitor but until you need to recover the files, there's nothing else to do. Zerto is very simple. We enjoy using the product.

The main difference between Veeam and Zerto is that with Zerto, we can get our near-instant recovery window to pull entire virtual machines back from the brink of failure. We might be able to implement more recovery windows for Veeam but from a data storage perspective, Zerto does a great job with deduplication.

We had a third party enable our Zerto configurations. They did a great job. The same VPGs are still running today.

We used an integrator for the setup. We had a good setup. They walked us through any issues we had after the setup.

I would rate Zerto a nine out of ten. There is a network issue that my team is still trying to figure out. Once we take care of it, it'll be a perfect ten.

Zerto should be our primary backup solution but until we can get the network issue resolved, it is relegated as a secondary source. It still does its job. We've used it multiple times for specific cases, and it's always passed with flying colors.

We use it primarily for DR situations. Whenever we lose our primary location, we switch to another location. We also backup resources and migrating VMs in and out of different environments, cloud versus on-prem.

The most valuable feature is that it provides real-time backup. We're in the financial industry and have to have 100 percent uptime.

It helps us have a lot better uptime than what we would normally have. It's always real-time synced, with instant recovery. We can return to another location if power drops or generators don't work.

It gives us quick uptime. It also helps our customers maintain that trust, so Zerto really does help with trust. We generally use it on-premise.

The near-synchronous replication is really good. It gives us quick uptime. It helps our customers keep that trust in us.

We use Zerto to protect VMs in our environment. Until Zerto, I didn't pay much attention to RPOs. Zerto gives the ability to bring RPOs down to seconds.

For certain use cases, Zerto has a better speed of recovery compared to other solutions but it doesn't tie into our SANs like Veeam does.

It is a little expensive.

We could streamline the installation better. The other thing would be ransomware notifications, like IO anomaly notifications. If they integrate with the SAN, that would be valuable to see in terms of snapshots.

I have been using Zerto for six to seven years.

We came up with the new version, and it's pretty good. If there's no reason for me to say it's unstable. It's been proven so far.

If you buy the licensing, it will scale up to size until you will spend money on it.

Support is helpful.

If you want to pull from the snapshot instead of tools, then SRMs are better used for this case. It's fast and the first to market with continuous data protection.

Zerto is easier to use. There is some standup at the beginning, you must install the agents. It's easy to use when it's working right, but sometimes, it takes great effort to get it going if something goes down.

We use another solution, Veeam. We keep them both because they're both beneficial for different use cases.

The initial setup is straightforward, but if you have it the first time, you are stranded in the industry. It could take a little figuring out, but Zerto is pretty helpful.

There have been a couple of situations which they weren't able to fix an issue right away. We move everything off to a different server until we can circle around and extend that one.

We did it in-house.

Zerto has paid for itself in man-hours saved.

Zerto gives you the ability to bring RPOs in seconds. We can have instant uptime for everything.

It's more expensive than other solutions but it's worth it for our environment. It has made it very easy to restore files because you can restore them down to the second. It's pretty simple. We have the agent and all the hosts.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We provide disaster recovery with Zerto in two scenarios. One is for our customers using on-premises deployments, and the other is for using the multi-tenant cloud. They're buying the cloud as a service, and we're also protecting that with it.

Zerto is primarily well-recognized as a leader in disaster recovery. It makes it easy for us to talk to our clients about the solution we provide them. Since it is Zerto-powered, we don't have to answer many questions about how it works, its reliability, or its capabilities. Thus, having name recognition, a positive company reputation, and technology benefits us.

The platform's ease of deployment and the ability to isolate failovers are key features for our customers who want to perform testing without interrupting their production environments. Those are the two primary use cases.

Our operational teams have discussed the ability to integrate multiple Zerto cloud platforms more seamlessly. For example, we have acquired 22 companies over the last seven years. Some already had it deployed, and integrating those existing deployments into our primary deployment is more challenging than it could be. We have provided our feedback to them.

Thryv has been using Zerto for about twelve years now.

As a product manager, I haven't received any feedback indicating issues with platform stability, which our engineering team would certainly inform me about.

We've had no issues with the product scalability so far, whether it's individual customers or even as an aggregated group.

The size of the environment varies. We have some small customers with only a handful of virtual machines and others with two, three, or four virtual machines.

In our previous company, we used VMware Site Recovery Manager and Veeam. However, over the last 12 to 14 years, we have primarily used Zerto.

We have our private cloud, and that's where we primarily use Zerto. We also manage some Microsoft Azure environments where we have sparingly used the service, mainly because the same functionality is not present as it is when using it in a private cloud.

Disaster recovery as a service is a significant component of our overall cloud services. So, the ROI lies in Thryv's profitability, as we offer a managed service that adds value to our customers and generates a profitable revenue stream.

The product's pricing is the one area where it is less competitive. However, we understand why it costs slightly more comparing the features and capabilities. Customers prioritizing price might choose a solution offering different RPOs and RTOs for a lower cost. We have provided feedback on whether there could be a lighter option or alternative that's more cost-effective for the customers while balancing cost and performance. It would help Zerto and us win more business.

The product is superior compared to the other vendors.

We offer disaster recovery as a service powered by Zerto. We have multiple disaster recovery targets in the US and the UK and are expanding into Canada and Hong Kong.

I am happy that they've reconsidered the decision to stop supporting Hyper-V, especially with all the changes happening in the Broadcom world and customers looking at it as a solution. Zerto's continuous support is key.

The near-synchronous feature is a differentiator. Other platforms compete with Zerto, with Veeam being the primary one, trying to get the same capabilities. It is a key factor for clients who need low RPOs and the ability to protect their data with minimal potential data loss. It cannot eliminate the potential for data loss entirely and has a minimal impact. If the customers have a production-impacting event, their data is as close as possible to a mirror of what they had at the time of the production loss. So, it is a significant factor.

To some extent, we have implemented DR with Microsoft. It is less feature-rich and has a different implementation. We offer the service but don't offer much in the public cloud. Replicating out of the public cloud adds a whole other set of challenges. We can replicate it to a VMware-based cloud. However, no VMware tools are available if we want to replicate it outside of Microsoft Azure. It makes for a different recovery and is a bit more labor-intensive.

It has greatly impacted the RPOs. As long as our customers have enough bandwidth to transmit the changes across the network to our cloud, the RPOs generally take a minute. However, if the customer has bandwidth constraints, it can take up to five minutes.

With Zerto, recovery is much cleaner and faster. It's orchestrated better, and the testing capability within the cloud is a valuable differentiator. Unfortunately, we don't have many customers experiencing disasters, so our experience is generally around the testing component and making simulated or even full recoveries for customers seeking that. It has always performed well.

I would give it a nine for everything around capabilities and the product itself. The only drawback is the pricing. If we could get a better pricing model, especially in larger deals where we need to be more competitive for price-conscious customers, that would be beneficial.

Overall, though, I'm happy with Zerto as a partner. My reaction would have been different if the Hyper-V decision hadn't changed, as that would have caused complications for some customers.

Our primary use case is to continuously replicate our VMs to our DR site. Having the ability to recover them at almost any point in time, mostly back thirty days, is the main purpose of Zerto.

We didn't previously have a continuous replication tool and now we have the ability to recover to any number of points in time. That's really beneficial to us. It cuts down our recovery time.

The most valuable feature is how quickly it powers down the original source VMs and the speed at which it powers up the new VMs. The amount of time it takes to put up the operating system is valuable. The speed is what I like the best.

The near-synchronous replication is awesome. When you get hit by a cyberattack, you never know where the clean VM resides, and at what point in time it actually exists. Having the ability to find the point in time when we are clean is a good thing.

We are going from a physical data center to a physical data center at the moment.

We use Zerto to protect VMs in our environment. It increased our ability to restore at a point in time. We didn't have it before, and now we have it.

Compared to other tools, Zerto is a lot faster. There are tools with your primary block storage backup, but they're just not as fast.

I'm having a problem with CentOS 7 and with VMs with multiple network adapters. Zerto recognizes those multiple network adapters on CentOS 7 vm but it will not give me the option to specify a failover IP, for that particular VM. Something's not working right, but Zerto is going to follow up.

Zerto has been in production for three months.

It seems stable so far.

The scalability seems pretty easy.

Customer service is really good. Technical technical support is lacking. At least from who I've been talking to. Maybe my case has not gotten bumped up to the higher level technicians. Customer support is great, and they're really responsive but their technical knowledge is just not quite there.

Zerto's documentation is outdated. I'm finding it hard to find documents related to my questions. Their documentation is bad.

The initial setup was very easy. We needed a little help with the initial configuration, but it was pretty straightforward.

We worked with Eagle Technologies for the deployment. We loved them.

I wasn't involved in negotiating any pricing. It evidently worked into our budget.

We also looked at Cohesity and Rubrik. I don't know that there's anything like Zerto. We went with Zerto because our third-party vendor recommended it. We also did a proof of concept two years ago. We liked what we saw with Zerto so we went with it.

Everybody taunts their one pane of glass but Zerto is simple to use. I really like the GUI, the interface is not too busy.

I would rate Zerto a nine out of ten. We don't have a test network setup. I know with Zerto, you can simulate a recovery.

Zerto would be a perfect ten if the documentation was easier and if level 1 support would be more knowledgeable.