Our systems are primarily Windows-based, but a big portion of the organization also runs on AS/400. About 40% of our systems are AS/400.

We use Zerto to replicate data from a primary data center to a secondary data center. In the previous incarnation, we used Zerto to replicate our secondary data center and also Azure because we were looking to start moving more and more things to Azure. We were considering Azure to have someplace where we could run some of our critical systems in the event we did not have much capacity in the secondary data center or it just made sense to leverage Azure for a particular application.

Zerto’s near-synchronous replication works very well. Most of the time, our systems are running about three seconds behind the primary, which is something most people are not going to complain about. It also has the ability to take you back to a point in time where everything is in sync. You can start from that point and maybe lose a couple of transactions as opposed to a typical backup environment where you could lose hundreds of transactions as a result of an outage. It can help revert systems to a specific point in time, providing continuity where data loss is minimal compared to traditional backup solutions.

We saw the benefits of Zerto right away. It gave us the confidence that if something happened, we would be able to restore our data. A notable benefit is the ability to conduct failover testing in a virtual environment. We can confirm operations without affecting external users. The software audits its processes, offering detailed reports.

Zerto has also continued to upgrade features, including Secure Vault and tools for immutability, enhancing ransomware protection, but a hardware change is required to fully benefit from Zerto's ransomware solutions. We have to go with their hardware versus what we are running. We can take advantage of some of the things that they do to help with ransomware, but we cannot get all the way there without switching the hardware.

We use Zerto to protect virtual machines. Our RPOs have moved. Prior to Zerto, and at different places, we have used other solutions such as Pure Storage or IBM replication solutions. Most of these solutions tend to have an RPO of minutes or more, whereas, with Zerto, we are looking at an RPO of less than ten seconds or something like that. That was one of the big differences we saw. It is also an integrated solution. You move the entire environment as opposed to some of the other environments where you connect to the storage, and then the storage is doing the replication. At the point at which something fails, you have to reconnect servers back up to the right hardware before you can get started in recovery. With Zerto, your recovery time goes down, and your RPO becomes much better.

The recovery time or RTO is much better with Zerto if you have the right bandwidth and other things. If you have an issue with latency or bandwidth, you may see those RTO numbers go up a little bit. Generally, RTOs are much better.

We have not seen Zerto reducing downtime in any situation. We have not necessarily seen an improvement there.

In terms of time savings in a data recovery situation, we went through a ransomware event at the last company. I have seen Zerto help from a ransomware perspective because one of the things that Zerto does is it maintains a whole bunch of snapshots as it goes along. In a ransomware situation, you can go back to the time before you were hit by the ransomware. You can go back in time and recover those servers. You can scan them to make sure they do not have whatever malware was installed for the ransomware, and then you can recover.

Zerto has had a huge impact on our resiliency strategy. It allows us to be able to leverage our secondary data center for a major event. It also frees us up to do more things in the local environment such as leveraging SQL Always On.

Zerto has not helped us to reduce overall DR testing. We would like to do more testing with Zerto, but some folks are very comfortable with just Zerto saying everything is okay. On the other hand, Zerto has been able to help us increase our testing where we could not do it before. That does not mean that we are satisfied with where it is. We would like to do more with it.

I appreciate the real-time nature of Zerto. It continuously copies data, maintains synchronization, and allows rapid recovery of key systems. In most situations, the recovery delay is approximately six seconds, minimizing data loss. It gives us the ability to recover without losing a bunch of data.

Additionally, it facilitates migration between environments. We are in a business that does a lot of acquisitions and divestitures. That can be tiring, but Zerto makes our path smooth because we can use it to replicate something to another location and then bring it up there.

When it comes to failover tests, we would like to be able to take that extra step to shut things down and see what it looks like at the other site versus just doing it in a virtual environment. That is one thing I would push back on them. I would like the ability to perform actual failovers more easily compared to our current process. In the event of an issue, we can switch and bring back servers smoothly, but when we do the tests, currently, Zerto's test failovers are virtual. We cannot get end users to come access those systems. I would like to be able to do a test where we failover and rebuild the network connections so that end-users can hit that center or server and test. Improving testing capabilities would be advantageous.

When it comes to deployment, one improvement could be being able to visually see virtual private groups and server names. Although the reporting is comprehensive, occasionally, people use long names that do not display fully on the monitoring page. Despite this minor issue, deployment has been easy, and we rarely need support.

I initially explored Zerto around 2018. That was when I first became aware of it and initiated a pilot project. It was not until around 2023 that I began working in an organization actively using it.

I have not observed any instability. Occasionally, systems might run out of space, which is a common issue in any setup. However, the software alerts us effectively, allowing prompt resolution. Overall, I have not seen any stability issues with the system.

I believe Zerto scales quite well. In our current environment, we manage around 200 servers, with licensing that supports up to 500. Scaling is largely about expanding compute and storage capacity. There are no significant barriers to scalability with Zerto.

They have support, but we do not tend to need support from them. They have a lot of good material online to learn about the product. For the most part, it just runs and does not complain about anything.

I have not personally contacted technical support. In my previous organization, other team members, one of the four or five colleagues, reached out to tech support.

I have used and explored several solutions, including Commvault and NetWorker. We have also used Rubrik, which effectively manages storage across data centers.

We constantly monitor available technologies to create strategies for using Zerto alongside others like Rubrik and NetWorker. We use Rubrik for certain things and NetWorker for other things, but without Zerto or any of the others, it would not work. Zerto's development aims to substitute some tools by enhancing functionality. They continue to work to add functionality that could then help us eliminate some of the other tools that we are using because we can get the same functionality out of Zerto.

It is extremely easy to deploy. The deployment is straightforward. Once the virtual replication appliances are connected to the environment, the system is ready to start. After licensing, replication begins.

In this particular organization, it was deployed before I got here. At the previous organization, it took a few weeks or a month. We had to set things up and wait for some storage. We then rolled it out. The actual rollout was something that was done overnight, and it was relatively easy to do.

The maintenance that it requires includes upgrades to the latest version of the software. There might be features that you want that are not available in the current version. Overall, the system just runs itself, but you may get an alert that says that this particular system has gone out of bounds of its RPO. You can go in to find out the problem. You might need to add space to the journaling system so that it can get back up again.

We had a team of probably four or five individuals handling the implementation.

We have always been able to get the pricing worked out. At this new company I am right now, we are doing well. We sometimes go through a third party to help us with pricing, but Zerto is fairly decently priced, especially when you consider some of the other solutions that are out there which could be very expensive.

I would rate Zerto a nine out of ten.

We primarily use Zerto for our DR requirements.

Near-synchronous replication is pretty much a major benefit from our perspective. We are mainly using it for DR.

We use Zerto to help protect VMs in our environment. With the use of Zerto, we now have defined RPOs, which is good.

Zerto has helped to reduce our organization's DR testing. It has also enabled us to do DR testing more thoroughly, so it has reduced the time, but it has also enabled us to do more of it.

In terms of its effect on our IT resiliency strategy, from our on-prem environment, it has been the cornerstone. We are now building a new DR strategy around Zerto because of the value that it has.

We were able to realize the benefits of Zerto pretty much immediately. At the end of the day, we had a gap. It had an immediate impact on our ability to recover.

What I like most about Zerto is that it just works at the end of the day. It is almost a set-it-and-forget-it solution in relation to its capability of keeping the DR environment in sync.

Testing is also a good feature. Bubble tests ensure the integrity of those images, and the replication process is also a major benefit.

Its capability to detect anomalies also within the transport layer is valuable. While moving and replicating the traffic, we have a little bit of comfort because of its ability to detect ransomware or anomalies within the transfer.

They should not make it so expensive so that I can buy more of it. Other than that, I do not have anything. We have not come across any issue. We are still fairly new to the product.

Zerto has been in our environment for 12 months.

It has been rock solid.

Scalability for us is based on the licensing count. I would scale it across the organization if possible, but I cannot. At the moment, it is meeting our current requirements based on our licensing constraints.

The only disaster recovery product we used was centered around recovery or restoration from backup. We never really had a disaster recovery product per se. It was managed by other backup mechanisms and replication forms.

Zerto was put in because we knew we had a gap within our DR strategy based on RPO extensions. It was deployed to bridge gaps within our DR strategy at that moment.

The initial setup was done by HPE. We went with a turnkey solution with HPE Professional Services and our incumbent tender previously used. They handled the installation and setup. We handle the management of it now, but I cannot comment much on the installation because they did it for us. It worked, and we went through training and have been using the product since.

Its learning has been fine. It has been like any other product. HPE has supported us. They have provided professional training for the team. I have not heard from the team about any issues or gaps. HPE has been very supportive of the implementation of Zerto.

It does not require any maintenance at our end. The installation is still fairly new. Nothing has come to a low yet. Over a period of time, we would probably have to spend more time on the maintenance aspect of it, but at the moment, it is pretty much a set-and-forget.

From a pricing standpoint, there is value in it without question. However, it can become quite expensive when you start looking at the number of workloads you have in the environment and what you would like to do.

We assessed other products in the market but found Zerto to be the best within this particular space. Additionally, Zerto was installed as part of a data center refresh program with HPE. We replaced compute and storage within our on-premise data centers. Considering Zerto is part of HPE, it made more sense to implement an end-to-end solution with HPE.

To new users evaluating it, I would say that if they can afford it, they should buy it.

I would rate Zerto a nine out of ten, and that is because there is always room for improvement.

I use Zerto for continuous data protection.

The solution is very effective at preventing ransomware attacks.

We have very good security now. It's enhanced our security. It has also massively improved disaster recovery.

The solution offers the shortest RPO time, the five-second RPO time, and continuous replication. The RPO is beyond our expectations. It's improved our RPO rate by 50%. These are great features. We have enhanced our security level after using Zerto, and there is a massive improvement in disaster recovery as well.

It's a straightforward product.

The near-synchronous replication is a great feature.

We've used Zerto to protect our virtual machines.

It's impacted our RTOs by improving it by 200%.

Zerto has reduced downtime. We now have zero downtime using this product. It's improved overall by 90%.

We've saved a lot of time with Zerto. It's hard to quantify since we don't have any ransomware getting attacks.

It's reduced our disaster recovery testing by 50%.

It's helped our IT resiliency strategy by 100%. Before this solution, we didn't have a solution in place. Now, we are quite resilient.

I don't see any improvements needed so far; we really enjoy using this product. However, there could be improvements in support. Here, in Malaysia, there is no on-site support.

I have used the solution for between one to two years.

I would rate the stability ten out of ten.

I would rate the scalability ten out of ten.

I would rate the customer service five out of ten. There is room for improvement. We need more local support.

We only have experience with Zerto. I can't compare it to other products.

The initial setup took one day. It was easy.

We have Zerto deployed on-prem. We have it deployed in multiple locations.

The solution does not require any maintenance.

The implementation was done by just two to four people.

The return on investment has been around 50% to 60%.

Zerto is cost-efficient.

Zerto has fortified and improved the resilience of our IT infrastructure. We currently experience zero downtime and use it to protect our virtual machines. The improvement exceeds our target. However, we desire more local support.

I'd recommend the solution to other users. It offers a short RPO time and will fortify a company's IT infrastructure.

I rate the product ten out of ten. We're a Zerto customer.

We implemented Zerto because we wanted a flexible and quick tool that allowed us to recover in different situations. This purpose was successfully fulfilled by Zerto during the proof of concept phase, so we implemented it.

Zerto helps with quick recovery and integration with other processes. Providing as a service approach allows end-users to operate and perform recovery operations on their own assets based on their requirements and schedule preferences. It helps not only with recovery but also with DR tests that need to be executed at specific time frames, such as out-of-business hours. We had a few different requirements during its implementation, and Zerto helped us very well with all these needs.

Zerto has some specific options for replication, but it is mainly for virtual machines. We mainly use it for virtual machines. Zerto is not suitable for physical servers, but it can be used for virtual solutions such as OpenShift, Kubernetes, etc. In terms of its effect on our RPO, as I have not used a similar solution previously, the RPO value that we are getting is very good. It fits the requirements that we have from our customers because what we provide to our customers needs to be proven by the tests that we perform. Usually, their expectations are much lower than what we receive from Zerto. For example, we have application owners for whom 24 hours duration is enough to recover the business as compared to the 10 minutes that I have using Zerto. We use Zerto in real DR exercises and ask our customers to verify the results and the status of the recovered system and answer if the recovery was successful. We provide them the time needed to recover their system, and often, it is much quicker than what they require, so from our perspective, Zerto is very good. However, we cannot verify everything because we have some limitations in our DR test scenario. I can be 100% sure of the results of recovery only in the case of a real disaster on my infrastructure. At this time, based on the DR tests, it meets my customer needs.

We conduct DR exercises at least twice a year to measure the downtime we would have in the case of a real disaster. We simulate the disaster in a controlled environment and perform all related exercises. Once all activities are performed, we measure the time needed to recover systems from the data center that is down due to a natural disaster or technical issue. We get an idea of the downtime but the actual downtime varies depending on the issue type. It might not always be predictable or reduced through tooling as network or server issues can arise. In some specific scenarios, the downtime could be lower by using Zerto, whereas in some cases, Zerto would not help much. Based on the results of disaster recovery exercises and the RTO measured not only for one application but for recovering all of the applications in affected data centers, we can say that the time we need to recover the full data center is much lower than using traditional backup recovery solutions. Recovery with Zerto is much faster because we can recover in parallel many systems.

I am quite familiar with the user interface. It is easy for me to operate and perform different operations because I am an experienced user. In my opinion, the user interface is easy to understand and operate. The user interface is user-friendly.

Another important feature is the tool's automation capabilities, as it provides an external API to integrate with other tools and processes. This allows for a comprehensive IT ecosystem within a single dashboard, tailored to specific needs. Some operations can be limited for end-users. All of this can be provided not only through the GUI but also using the API. You can create your own application, integrate it with Zerto API, and develop features in your own application. You can use the API to integrate with your application and provide only the features that you want to end-users, facilitating custom application development. You can split the responsibilities based on the roles provided as well as based on your requirements. It is very flexible. From my point of view, the end-user experience is very good as an administrator of the tool and as the person responsible for the disaster recovery process.

As a user who used Zerto for eight years, there are specific issues that it cannot address. For instance, recovering physical servers is directly connected to the virtualized solution in use, meaning your infrastructure needs a VMware or Hyper-V solution. It cannot be used for bare metal physical server solutions. One improvement could be addressing the market segment related to physical servers. I understand this is a limitation of Zerto's technology. Still, from a customer's perspective, I would ask the vendor to find a solution to use Zerto for virtualized physical systems, such as physical servers.

A second area for improvement relates to the speed of implementation. There should be a more streamlined process for enterprise applications.

I have used Zerto for about eight years.

I did not encounter any issues during the operations, so I would rate it a nine out of ten for stability, so there is room for improvement on the vendor's side.

From my perspective, given the size of my infrastructure and the limitations based on the vendor's requirements and documentation, it fulfills my needs. Therefore, I would rate it a ten out of ten because I have not faced a situation where I needed more than what it provides.

It is being used at multiple locations.

I have the opportunity to use Zerto support, and I have used it many times for various questions and solving different issues or problems I encountered in my infrastructure. I would give them a rating of ten because it represents the highest level of support based on the technical knowledge of the support team, response time, and effectiveness of the provided resolutions.

Zerto was the first tool I started using once I took on the disaster recovery manager role in my company. I did not have experience with other tools.

The speed of implementation is an area for improvement. While deployment on straightforward infrastructure is easy, an enterprise company with strict access and vulnerability limitations requires manual configurations. This is neither easy nor quick.

Implementation depends on the environment and customers. From an enterprise perspective, I expect a more streamlined implementation process, as many steps require manual action. This challenge is specific to my company due to limited access and port blockages. Implementing such tools is a one-time task. My intention is to provide feedback related to the installation process, not the operation.

I do not have much experience with different tools, so I cannot directly compare Zerto with other solutions. While conducting our proof of concept, I compared prices with just one other vendor. At the time, the price for Zerto was more favorable. Since I only use this tool and I do not have the need for others, it is difficult to compare the price now.

Zerto is an asynchronous replication solution. It provides what they call near-zero RPO value. There is a delay of a few seconds depending on the parameters of your infrastructure, such as the bandwidth, the workload in your infrastructure, the distance between data center latencies, and the speed of the network connections. There is no one solution that meets all the needs. You need to decide whether you need a synchronous or asynchronous solution. You should be aware of the pros and cons of both and the requirements of your organization. Synchronous replication might be risky in some specific situations. What looks good on paper might not always be good in reality. Zerto meets our needs for flexibility. It mitigates different problems related to infrastructure, even though there is always the possibility of losing some data.

I would rate Zerto a ten out of ten considering the features, support, feature development roadmap, and the frequency of new features provided to customers.

We are using Zerto as a DR solution. We also utilize Zerto when we have to migrate any servers from one location to another.

Previously, we were using VMware Site Recovery Manager, and we were not happy with the services we received. There were lots of issues. Since implementing Zerto, we have been happy. We are not seeing any issues with the services. Zerto's support is also excellent. If we encounter any issues, we open a ticket, and they are available all the time.

When we implemented Zerto, we were not sure how things would work. We have a DR test or maintenance window every quarter. During the first window, when we did the DR implementation through Zerto, we found it to be very helpful. Previously, we used to manually take screenshots for DR evidence, whereas now, we can generate a report from Zerto. After the DR, it tells everything in detail such as when a VM was moved, what the procedure was, and how much time it took to consolidate from the primary site to the DR site.

When we had an issue with a legacy application over the weekend and users reported it on Monday, we had to revert the VM to a snapshot from eight hours prior. We could do that easily. This is an excellent feature. Zerto allows us to select a custom recovery time. For instance, if no one checked the server yesterday because it was a holiday and we needed to restore the VM to the day before yesterday, we could do that quickly. Zerto helps address downtime situations effectively.

Zerto has reduced the DR testing time. Previously, it took three to four hours, including app testing, but now it gets completed in one hour.

Zerto is excellent. It is the primary and only solution we are using in our organization.

The constant replication between the primary and the DR site is valuable. Zerto's near-synchronous replication is excellent.

Zerto is very easy to use. A new team member can pick up the pace in one or two days. Someone who has never worked with Zerto can understand it in one week. It has a user-friendly graphical user interface. Everything is well described.

I have one recommendation, but I am not sure if it has been addressed in the current or upcoming version. The challenge we faced occurred during a DR for a database server running on SQL Always On. We experienced a database crash and logged a case with Zerto about a year ago. They said that they do not support Always On. As a result, we had to plan accordingly. We deployed another server to that location with Always On and moved all the database servers out of the Zerto application. We are uncertain if Zerto now supports Always On because we have not explored that option. We have a couple of environments on the cloud but have not tested if that feature is available or not.

I have been using Zerto for the last four to five years.

We have experienced no issues at all.

I would rate Zerto a ten out of ten for scalability.

Zerto's support is excellent. At the time of implementation, the support was slightly delayed because there was only one way to log cases, which was through the portal. They provided us with a few articles to refer to, which helped us address the solution.

We had VMware Site Recovery Manager (SRM), which was very difficult to manage. Sometimes, we faced replication issues. When performing a failover, the network was not stable. There were many issues, including dependencies on the storage area, requiring the storage team to be available during DR tests. The network team also had to be available, involving multiple teams. With Zerto, we do not need the involvement of the storage area or network teams.

It was easy. Initially, we took help from Zerto support because we were not sure about the configuration and best practices. We received help from Zerto.

The challenge was not from Zerto's perspective; deploying VMs where we were going to install Zerto took some time. We had dependencies on aspects such as VMs not being ready. The deployment of only Zerto took less than eight hours.

We reached out to Zerto for any support.

One person can handle the implementation, but if that person is not available, it creates challenges. Whenever we undertake projects, it is between team members. One person deploys, but everyone is involved so that everyone is aware of what is being done.

Currently, it is good, but the license we are using is based on VM count. We are only protecting mission-critical servers, so we are using a very low number, about 300. However, we have 3,000 or more servers. If we consider using Zerto for data protection, it would cost us more than what we have for data protection now.

For new users, Zerto used to offer free training and certification. I am not sure if it is still available, but it was available. Anyone planning to deploy Zerto can get support from Zerto and should go through the basic training, which is free on the Zerto website. They can get certification and reach out to Zerto support if needed. Having a basic understanding of how Zerto works is important.

Overall, I would rate Zerto an eight out of ten because we do not have the functionality to protect our database servers that are on Always On.

It is part of a new deployment. We have a large deployment for the public sector in the UK, and we are using Zerto to enable disaster recovery by replicating data. This allows us to have a very low recovery point objective for that data.

Zerto is easy to use and fairly straightforward to set up. It reliably keeps the data in sync which is all that we can ask of it. It does what it says on the tin, and that takes away any worries. We know that we will be able to recover as we are contracted to do.

Having Zerto in place takes a headache off my plate. I do not have to worry about it. I check it, or I have my team check that it is up to date and synchronizing. All they have to do is log on, have a look, and confirm that we are okay and have green lights across the board. It is very easy to understand the interface.

It is one of those things that sits and does its job and does it well. Therefore, we do not have to worry about it. That is the biggest thing. We have peace of mind at the end of the day.

Zerto's near-synchronous replication is very important. We run an application in the SaaS model for our customers. Our customers sign into our application. It is a purchasing application called PECOS. We do purchasing and inventory management. They sign in to our systems and do their business. We have to ensure that the systems are highly available. In the event of a disaster, we can bring them up with a minimum loss of data. That is where Zerto comes in.

We use Zerto to help protect VMs in our environment. Our recovery point objective by contract is within four hours, but practically, it is within five minutes. Zerto is very effective. If I look at it during the day, I generally see that we are within nine to ten seconds. It is a very good thing to see.

Zerto recovery is a lot faster than recovery from a tape or a digital backup. We did a test against the old RecoverPoint and found Zerto to be faster. We also do disaster recovery tests. I have a full disaster recovery test coming up at the end of the month. We expect to be able to bring up the entire environment for our customer within 45 minutes, which is very good.

Zerto has not reduced our downtime, but it has made us feel a lot better. In the event we have downtime, we have some protection there.

Zerto has not saved us time in a real-time data recovery situation. In our rehearsals, it definitely has saved time. Hopefully, our systems have been built reliably enough that we would not have to use it for one. It is just an insurance system.

We still do DR testing. We have noticed a speed improvement in our DR testing. It is slightly faster, but we still have to do DR testing. As with any system, you have to make sure it works.

Zerto has given us confidence in our IT resilience strategy. We had similar strategies in place with the previous infrastructure. We completely renewed our entire infrastructure and replaced it with HPE backend and SAN. Zerto is the recovery solution. We have a lot of confidence that it will work if called upon.

Zerto is quite straightforward to use. It is quite easy to set up. Getting it right is a bit more complex, but setting it up is quite straightforward.

It seems to be very reliable, and it consistently keeps our data synchronized within ten seconds or so, which gives our customers confidence that the data synchronization and replication will allow for a very low recovery point objective.

The onboarding was not very good. It felt like, "Now you have Zerto, good luck. Figure out how to use it." It was not terrible. Their support since having the product has been good when I have had an issue, but there was not much of an onboarding process. The setup of the system, although simple to get working, is a little more tricky to get right. This aspect could have benefitted from a bit more explanation.

It is very easy to simply say, "There are manuals." A little hand-holding upfront instead of trying to get it right by going through a big manual would have saved a lot of time. Once I reported a problem, they were very quick to jump on that and assist us with it. It is not a huge criticism, but it would have saved time. A little bit of upfront help would have stopped us from getting into that cycle. At the end of the day, I am happy with the product. It works.

I have been using Zerto for four months.

It is stable. I would rate it a nine out of ten for stability.

I do not know about scalability. We have implemented it for the size that we need. We have not tried to change licenses, add VMs, or grow it at all. From what I understand, it is very good. We will have to increase the usage but not for a good six months or so.

Our environment has about 400 virtual machines. It is not massive. We are an application provider. We provide a purchasing and inventory management application set to our customers mainly in the UK public sector. Our clients are large organizations. They are health care and local government organizations.

I have a team of eight people. They are not daily involved with Zerto. Only four people are daily involved with Zerto.

The only issues we had stemmed from a lack of familiarity. After we submitted the ticket, their technical support got back to us and helped us resolve the issues.

I would rate them an eight out of ten. It has been very good.

We used another replication system prior to this, which was the old EMC RecoverPoint. It was very good as well, but we had a change in technology. We shifted our technology to HPE for various reasons, and Zerto was the offering that came with their data synchronization.

Overall, it was straightforward. I did it myself in the afternoon by figuring it out myself. It took us a few days to get it right and then another couple of days fiddling with it, but it was under a week.

It requires very little maintenance on a day-to-day basis. It requires monitoring to ensure that you are not running out of space. Once you have got those space parameters right, it pretty much looks after itself unless there are significant changes.

We update Zerto when a new version is available. At that point, we schedule an update.

I managed the deployment initially, but it has now been handed off to a team.

It is too early to say. I think it will eventually prove beneficial by saving us time and eliminating the constant worry of checking these things.

Having seen the product and how it works and its reliability, it seems it will pay for itself.

Nothing is cheap, but Zerto represents decent value.

I would recommend Zerto. It seems to be a very good product. It appears to be stable, and it is a simple product to manage that gives us peace of mind.

I would rate Zerto a nine out of ten. The tiny amount of problems we have encountered is reasonably insignificant. It works.

We use it in our data center. We have two data centers, one in Baton Rouge and one in Las Vegas, and we use it for replication. It is all used in the data center.

We did not have replication previously. Once we got Zerto, we started seeing everything backed up and replicated, and we saw its benefits pretty early. Over the years, we have kept renewing Zerto because it seems to get better. There have not been any issues with it.

Near-synchronous replication works very well. We use pretty big storage with them and never had a problem. If it is close to going over, we always get an email, and it is easy to keep up with all that, which is pretty important here at Credit Union. I have nothing but positive to say about Zerto.

Zerto is easy to use. When we first started using it, we used the emails they sent at the end of the night to see everything was fine. About five years ago, they got their own portal. Since then, we have been able to see everything in real-time. It has been super easy. I automatically get notifications on my phone or email. That has been a real high point for me with them.

We have several VMs, and Zerto has been a part of the protection plan for them.

Knowing what is going on in real-time has helped with breaches and things like that. Recently, there have been no issues. Luckily, over the last year or two, we have not had any security issues. Zerto and VMware are what we count on in our data center. As long as the data center is up and running safely, we are good here at the branch.

We run reports on XDR and get an idea of anything that has been going on. Luckily, we have been safe for the last year or two, but in 2022, there was an issue. Zerto was right on it, and we were able to get it cleaned up. Zerto has definitely helped in the ransomware aspect.

The portal is a valuable feature. I am here in Baton Rouge, and I can get into the Vegas data center and see real-time replication on the portal. The portal has been upgraded over the past several years, and it is probably the most helpful part of it.

I always get some blowback about the cost. It does not seem too bad to me. We had to upgrade to a premium subscription to get some other features. Maybe a one-size-fits-all option would be better.

I have used Zerto for eight to ten years.

I have not experienced any stability issues. We are a heavy usage bank, and it has always been steady for us. I do not have anything bad to say about that.

Scalability has been good too. We started with the one in Baton Rouge and added the one in Vegas about five years ago. It was very easy to connect them and get them mirroring each other. Scalability has been good for us.

When my staff member went to Vegas, there were some issues with logging into the device. He called the tech line and was able to talk to someone. We have had luck getting in touch with those guys. Their customer service deserves a good score, at least an eight out of ten.

At the previous bank, it was a big Cisco shop, but I have been here for almost ten years, and we have had Zerto for that long. Zerto is what I am used to.

I did not personally do the initial setup. A guy who works for me went to Vegas, called it in, and got it set up pretty well. I do not go to Vegas much, but I have been to Baton Rouge. I have tested it and played with it, and every time I have done that, it seems easy to use. My network administrator has never complained about any difficulty. For the most part, it is easy. They have a good tech support line, and if we have any trouble, they are easy to get in touch with. We are happy with that.

We have a maintenance contract with them, but I did not have to use it except for one instance a few years ago when we thought that we were going to get ransomware. We had maintenance on that. The good thing is that it is a part of the renewal. It is safe to have it, but luckily, we have not had to use it over the last few years.

Price-wise, it works fine for me, but my budgetary team is always looking for ways to cut costs, and it seems like they first look at the data center and the IT side to find savings.

Take advantage of the maintenance plan; even if it is not required, it is definitely worth getting. The techs there are really good. There are local Zerto reps who come around. Use the tech support when needed because they are always very good.

I would rate Zerto a nine out of ten.

My original use case was to protect against ransomware and any critical failure in our infrastructure, and that has been carried through to the present day.

It is incredibly easy to use, which attracted me to the product. I have been doing IT for over 30 years, so it did not take me very long at all to learn it. That is a good thing because when you have a solution like this going in, you want to make sure that you are fully confident with it within a short period of time. The learning curve for this solution was very short.

Zerto’s near-synchronous replication is good. Previously, when I tried to do it at a SAN level, which was part of the SAN vendor's portfolio of solutions, I could never get it to work. It was not very user-friendly. It was complex and difficult to configure. In comparison to that, Zerto shines.

Over the years, they have brought in immutable backups. They have brought in cloud migration, though I have not used that due to the nature of the Azure tools I use, but I have used immutable backups. In the past, we replicated from our on-prem site to our data center, and then more recently, we replicated from our on-prem site to Azure. The next stage is to replicate from Azure to another part of Azure or another region.

Zerto has had a very high impact on our RPOs. The recovery is very fast. It is instantaneous. We have already got everything replicated on our remote site, so we can just fire it up. All we have to do is follow through the scripts to change it over.

Previously, our RTO was very much in the order of two days. After we implemented Zerto, it is in the order of an hour.

We put in Zerto in response to ransomware because I had to do quite a lot of manual jumping around. Hopefully, we shut the gate on that problem. We have a solution to utilize.

We are a small to medium organization. We did not do downtime testing before we had Zerto, but now we do. It gives me the ability to test. We never had that option of testing. Usually, you cannot test the system in real-time because you have to turn off the live, whereas Zerto allows you to do it with different VLANs, etc. We can spin it up and effectively test it out. If I was doing a manual test, it would have probably taken me two or three days. I can do that in maybe 15 minutes. There is a 20 to 30 times improvement.

Zerto has had an effect on our IT resiliency strategy. It has supplemented where we did not have a tool before.

The ability to test that my backup regime is actually doing and working as I want it to do is valuable. It provides visibility and comfort. I can see in real-time that things are replicating, and my SLAs for my RPO and RTO are available instantly. That gives a lot of comfort. It is the sort of thing that gives you peace of mind.

Some of the cloud instructions around VNets and peering of networks could be clearer with some best-case examples. It is more complicated once you move into the cloud than running it on-premises. Actually doing these things is quite easy in the cloud and with Azure, but understanding how it fits in my environment can be quite a head-scratcher at times.

I started using it in early 2016 and have continued until the present day.

I would rate it a ten out of ten for stability. I never had a problem with it.

It has been fine. It has grown with the business as we changed things around. It has been very flexible. I would rate it a ten out of ten for scalability.

Their support is pretty good.

I used EMC SAN. Zerto is 400 times better. The previous one just did not work. I bought the SAN with the intention of having recoverability with it, and I could never get it to work. There was relatively zero support. It does not encourage us to persevere with it. We just ended up using it as a SAN and moved over to another solution.

We currently have a hybrid setup because we cannot migrate in seconds. It takes quite a long time to pick a network and move it into the cloud. It is not as easy as you would hope when you start moving into the cloud. There is a bit of complexity. If you have a network with multi-subscription, multi-network, VNETs, and peers, it takes a little bit longer to try and figure out how to make it work.

Initially, when I first put it on-premises, it took me about a day to get it working. In the cloud, it took a few days to head-scratch through it.

It is currently running between on-premises and Azure cloud. We do not split by department. We are not big enough to do that. We run a centralized compute function for the entire business, so it is relatively straightforward and flat as a design. Everyone uses the same environment.

It is used by only IT people. There are six of us in IT, but only three people use it with me being the primary person.

It requires a relatively small amount of maintenance. They have moved over to Linux-based machines, so we no longer have to upgrade them. We can apply a very simple process to update the actual version of Zerto. It needs a little bit of maintenance, maybe for an hour or so a month. I do the maintenance. I just keep an eye on it.

It is difficult to quantify that. I have seen no return on investment because I do not calculate around that sort of thing. If we had any disaster, we would have used it for real and would have seen a massive return on investment. It gives me peace of mind. If I am happy, then the management is happy.

Zerto has not helped reduce downtime in any situation because we have not had any downtime. Most people like me hope we never have to use it. It is like insurance.

It is not the cheapest product; it is not the most expensive product, but it works. It is a mid-range product, and it is justified in terms of being pretty quick and easy.

I would definitely recommend it, especially for people who have no current method of implementing a disaster recovery solution. It is a quick and easy fix, and I would highly recommend it.

I would rate Zerto a nine out of ten because we need a few more scenario examples when moving into Azure.

Right now, I am using it for disaster recovery and file recovery, with all the different components of it. It is just site-to-site replication from one site to another. I have done server moves, and I will also do server moves in a couple of weeks.

I use Zerto to help protect VMs in our environment. That is 100% of my use case. It helps us to commit to the recovery point as per our standards. Our RPO is under five minutes for everything I have got in there unless there is a sync happening at that point in time. It has greatly reduced RPOs and made them stable and knowable.

Our RTOs are even better. We are also a Cohesity customer. Our tier one, two, and some tier three are in Zerto. For everything else, the plan is to bring it out or restore it from the backup in case of a DR or an event where there is an issue with the server. We know that bringing something online in Zerto is dramatically faster. It is a night and day difference. Restoring everything from the backup would take days or a week, whereas with Zerto, as soon as I make the change, everything will automatically come online at my other location. For example, I have a file server that is 50T. Restoring that from the backup took three or four days, whereas in Zerto, we can flip it over, and it would be up and running in seconds.

Zerto helps us reduce downtime. If something happens and we need to bring a server up that is in Zerto, it will only take the amount of time required to commit and make sure that everything is functioning as expected, changing or updating IPs and names, and making sure that is good to go. It takes five to ten minutes.

For auditing and other things, we can do a controlled VR test where we bring up all the necessary components in an isolated bubble with networking for just that bubble and bring it online. We can test SQL Servers, Exchange Servers, Active Directory, connectivity, authentication, and applications. We can bring it all online in that bubble while production is still going on without impacting anybody. In the event that we flip the switch and have to go, everything is going to work. In addition to meeting auditing needs, we have been able to refine the process so that in the case of an unfortunate event, we know we will be able to do it. We will be able to do it quicker than coming in cold and having never tested it or done it.

Zerto has had a big impact on IT resiliency strategy. We know that as long as our boxes are protected by Zerto, we are covered. We will be able to spin a box up at our remote DR site and bring it online. It will be functional, and all the data will be there. It is not just about fulfilling an audit request; I sleep better at night knowing that we are protected, the data is there, and there are not going to be any issues. Zerto has near-synchronous replication. It works very well. I have been fortunate enough not to have to use it in a production environment, but I have used it to restore files.

From the server moves, I know that I can cut over in a couple of seconds and all the data is there and ready to go. There is no lag. There is no waiting. I just have to update the IP and register that in DNS if the IP changes, and it is good to go. It is fantastic.

What I like most about Zerto is that it makes my job much easier. I have peace of mind knowing that it works. The replication time and the minor amount of time it takes to sync a new server outside of any of my huge 40-terabyte boxes is ridiculously quick. When I add a server, it is there in 15 minutes. I know it is protected. It is fantastic. There is peace of mind knowing that the workloads I put in there are protected. It is very easy to use. In day-to-day usage, it is very simple and easy to set things up or monitor it. I check it every morning and keep track throughout the day of what is going on and if there are any issues.

I am an advocate and a fan of the product, and I have had great success. The only negative I would give is that with the latest version of the appliance, setting up authentication was a bit of a challenge, but that is just a matter of using Keycloak and how things have changed. Other than that, I have had no complaints.

I have used the solution for seven years.

I have had no complaints. It has been running very well.

I have contacted customer service many times for various issues. Overall, they have been good, and I would rank them in the higher percentile of the support I have dealt with. Sometimes, I have had to get through a couple of techs or work solidly with somebody, or I have not fully explained the issue correctly. Once we get on the same page, the issue has been quick and easy to resolve. Nothing has hung up for too long.

I would rate them a ten out of ten. I have never had an issue that was not resolved, and I have never been in a situation where they did not respond. They are very responsive. They do get back very quickly. That is another very nice thing. It is not like Microsoft where things go into a queue and disappear for weeks at a time or a week at a time. They are also knowledgeable.

The initial setup was very easy. The documentation was good. I am a stickler, so rather than giving Zerto full rights, I went through the vCenter and allowed just the rights that were specified by the documentation. Those have always been correct, and I have not had an issue.

The actual implementation of the software went smoothly, bringing everything in. I remember upgrading it. We had a major revision from Windows to the Linux appliance, which was not a full redo, but it was a pretty major changeover. Things are done differently there, and documentation for everything, except authentication, worked very well, and we have had no issues.

It does not require much maintenance from our end. We mainly need to take care of upgrading and verifying any issues. The software itself runs fine. Every once in a while, I may have too many servers on the same host causing an issue and overloading the VRA. I just separate things.

Overall, I would rate Zerto a ten out of ten. The software has been awesome. It has made my life easier and my sleeping at night better.

I use Zerto for backup and restore.

With both Veeam and vCenter, the restoration process took a considerable amount of time. Zerto bragged about how their restoration was much faster, and it was true. It seemed unrealistically faster when they described and said that they could restore a VM within minutes. With vCenter and Veeam, when we restore a VM, depending on the size of the VM, it can take hours. Zerto proved true, and we have tested it numerous times now. We have done restorations via Zerto, and it truly does a full restoration of a VM within minutes. That was the problem we needed to solve, and they provided the solution. We are very pleased.

We are able to do a restoration so quickly because it backs up in near real-time. Of course, nothing is going to be in real-time, but it is as near real-time as possible. Instead of copying a larger amount of data, it is able to copy just delta data which is in a compressed form so that replication is more frequent. If we need to do a restoration, we will be missing less data.

Its interface is like any enterprise-grade utility. It is complex and not easy to use, but it is learnable.

We were able to see its benefits after some time. That was mostly because we did not have a good opportunity to test it in production. The initial onboarding came with an opportunity for us to do a test backup and restoration, but that was test data. You find the true value of this platform when you use it in a production environment where a stakeholder is involved and there is data that if you do not restore will lead to problems.

We use Zerto to help protect VMs in our environment. The restoration time is in minutes versus hours. That goes a long way towards our RPO. With our previous platform, it took two hours, and with this platform, it takes five minutes. It has also had a positive effect on our RTOs.

Zerto has helped us to reduce downtime with a restoration time of five minutes versus two hours.

We have not had to use it for restoration because of ransomware. We were using a couple of VMs to test migration to a new database. While testing that migration, we caused damage to the VMs. We then used Zerto to restore them prior to that damage, and it was fantastic. The restoration was quick and effective, and we were back in production in minutes versus hours.

Zerto has reduced the time spent on DR testing but we still do the same number of DR tests throughout the year to make sure. It just takes a lot less time.

Zerto has improved our confidence tremendously, and it has reduced the RPO of any potential restoration needs.

I find Zerto's ability to restore a virtual VM much more quickly than Veeam or vCenter's restoration capabilities to be incredibly valuable.

I cannot think of any features that Zerto does not have. They probably have a lot of features that I do not even use. I am primarily interested in Zerto as a backup and recovery mechanism, and it does a phenomenal job of that. It is an enterprise-grade tool, and enterprise-grade tools tend to be complex. They can be a little difficult to use at first until you learn them. It is not reasonable to suggest making it easier to use because it is an enterprise-grade tool, and it is very robust. Therefore, it is not going to be easy to use. I just have to spend the time to learn it and become good at it. I am very pleased with it as is, but the ease of use of the restoration utility could be challenging initially.

I have used Zerto for just over a year.

It is 100% stable. We have had no downtime with it, and we are pleased with its uptime and stability. We have great confidence that it will be available and usable when needed.

I have not personally contacted Zerto customer service, but Todd, my sysadmin, is the primary point of contact for Zerto. He has contacted them for issues or day-to-day troubleshooting. When there is an upgrade to be done, he always reaches out to them to get guidance and ensure that he is doing the upgrades correctly. They are very good to work with.

We were using Veeam. There were no security concerns. It was more about performance. The restoration took approximately two hours with Veeam compared to five minutes with Zerto. The benefit was obvious, but there were no concerns about data security in the backups, protection mechanisms, or air gaps on either platform. It was just about the performance.

Neither one is easy to use. They are both very similar. Veeam is probably a little bit more complex than Zerto. Zerto is already doing a slightly better job than Veeam in ease of use, but they are both very complex and difficult to learn at first until you learn them.

Anything new is always going to have a level of difficulty. It was difficult, but Zerto's onboarding development team helped us every step of the way. As we crossed bridges and had problems, that team jumped right in the middle of it and helped us resolve each and every problem until we were a hundred percent satisfied.

To fully set it up, from the kickoff call until I was satisfied that it was fully functional, it took about two weeks. There was probably a month's worth of preparatory work done in advance of the actual kickoff call and deployment, including some information gathering. You could include those 30 days prior as part of that work. Technically, it was about two weeks from the kickoff call to fully deployed and fully functional.

It is a one-person job. One person primarily takes care of it, but we have three of us who are kept abreast and familiar with the process so that we do not have a single point of failure. It is definitely something that one person can handle.

In terms of maintenance, it requires periodic patching and upgrades.

It is an enterprise-grade product. When you buy enterprise-grade tools, you have to expect to pay a higher price. It goes back to the idea of you get what you pay for. If you want an old cheap tool, you pay cheap prices to get it. If you want a good-quality tool that is robust and does a good job for you, you have to pay a higher price to get that, and Zerto is no different. We pay a little bit higher than the cheap tool price, but we get our money's worth. I am not dissatisfied with the price.

I would rate Zerto a nine out of ten. There is nothing that is absolutely perfect, but Zerto does a pretty good job of getting as close to perfect as they can.