TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Windows Server Failover Clustering vs. HPE Zerto Software

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Windows Server Failover Clustering

    Score8.7 out of 10
    N/AWindows Server Failover Clustering (WSFC) is a group of independent servers that work together to increase application and service availability.N/A

    HPE Zerto Software

    Score9.4 out of 10
    Enterprise companies (1,001+ employees)
    HPE Zerto Software aims to enable customers to run an always-on business by simplifying the protection, recovery, and mobility of on-premises and cloud applications.N/A
    Pricing
    Windows Server Failover ClusteringHPE Zerto Software
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Windows Server Failover ClusteringHPE Zerto Software
    Free Trial
    NoYes
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeOptional
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    Windows Server Failover ClusteringHPE Zerto Software
    Considered Both Products
    Microsoft
    No answer on this topic
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    100%
    Would buy again
    9 Answers
    97%
    Would buy again
    34 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    9 Answers
    91%
    Delivers good value for the price
    30 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    100%
    Happy with the feature set
    9 Answers
    100%
    Happy with the feature set
    35 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    7 Answers
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    32 Answers
    Implementation went as expected
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    8 Answers
    97%
    Implementation went as expected
    34 Answers
    Features
    Windows Server Failover ClusteringHPE Zerto Software
    Data Center Backup
    Comparison of Data Center Backup features of Windows Server Failover Clustering and HPE Zerto Software
    Feature
    Windows Server Failover Clustering
    -
    Ratings
    HPE Zerto Software
    8.3
    3 Ratings
    4% above category average
    Universal recovery00 Ratings8.52 Ratings
    Instant recovery00 Ratings8.33 Ratings
    Recovery verification00 Ratings9.33 Ratings
    Business application protection00 Ratings8.73 Ratings
    Multiple backup destinations00 Ratings8.52 Ratings
    Incremental backup identification00 Ratings8.12 Ratings
    Backup to the cloud00 Ratings7.43 Ratings
    Deduplication and file compression00 Ratings7.73 Ratings
    Snapshots00 Ratings8.02 Ratings
    Flexible deployment00 Ratings8.73 Ratings
    Management dashboard00 Ratings9.13 Ratings
    Platform support00 Ratings7.03 Ratings
    Retention options00 Ratings9.03 Ratings
    Encryption00 Ratings8.02 Ratings
    Enterprise Backup
    Comparison of Enterprise Backup features of Windows Server Failover Clustering and HPE Zerto Software
    Feature
    Windows Server Failover Clustering
    -
    Ratings
    HPE Zerto Software
    8.3
    2 Ratings
    3% above category average
    Continuous data protection00 Ratings9.52 Ratings
    Replication00 Ratings8.52 Ratings
    Operational reporting and analytics00 Ratings7.52 Ratings
    Malware protection00 Ratings7.01 Ratings
    Multi-location capabilities00 Ratings9.52 Ratings
    Ransomware Recovery00 Ratings8.02 Ratings
    Disaster Recovery
    Comparison of Disaster Recovery features of Windows Server Failover Clustering and HPE Zerto Software
    Feature
    Windows Server Failover Clustering
    -
    Ratings
    HPE Zerto Software
    8.3
    3 Ratings
    9% above category average
    Disaster Recovery Planning00 Ratings8.73 Ratings
    Hot Sites00 Ratings8.03 Ratings
    Disaster Recovery Testing00 Ratings9.33 Ratings
    Automated Disaster Recovery00 Ratings7.02 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Windows Server Failover ClusteringHPE Zerto Software
    Small Businesses
    No answers on this topic
    Arcserve ShadowProtect
    Score6.7 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    No answers on this topic
    Datto SIRIS
    Score9.8 out of 10
    Enterprises
    No answers on this topic
    Zerto on IBM Cloud
    Score8.4 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Windows Server Failover ClusteringHPE Zerto Software
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.2
    (13 ratings)
    8.3
    (54 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    8.0
    (4 ratings)
    Usability
    9.7
    (4 ratings)
    8.0
    (29 ratings)
    Support Rating
    8.2
    (3 ratings)
    4.0
    (34 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.0
    (2 ratings)
    Contract Terms and Pricing Model
    -
    (0 ratings)
    6.7
    (16 ratings)
    Professional Services
    -
    (0 ratings)
    7.7
    (5 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Windows Server Failover ClusteringHPE Zerto Software
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Microsoft
    Windows ServerFailover Clustering works very well for applications that can sustain a short disconnect when failing over. It works, and works well, in providing single-node applications HA, meaning an active/passive setup. It is not a load balancing solution. Use NLB for that. Another area that it works well is when used in combination with Hyper-V. We set our Hyper-V hosts up as clusters, and those clusters also host clusters for SQL Server and other enterprise class applications like BMC's Control-M/Enterprise and Control-M/Server.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    Zerto is well suited for disaster recovery and virtual machine replication between multiple data centers. DR testing for audit or regulations is much easier with Zerto, great reporting, dashboard etc. It is not well suited for physical server replication for disaster recovery or as a primary backup solution.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Microsoft
    • Live Migration of VMs between hosts. If you have sufficient network bandwidth, it is fast and I never had a failed live migration break the VM or kill it. Worst case is the live migration will fail (not enough RAM for example) but the VM always stayed up.
    • Windows Server Failover Clustering enables Scaleout Storage, which is probably the coolest feature Microsoft has to offer at this moment. It gives you Active-Active SMB file shares which can now be used by most Microsoft Services like MS SQL, Hyper-V, etc. and clients if Windows 8+
    • Cluster Validation is really complete and easy to understand. The validation gives you comprehensive error messages that help to diagnose and fix rapidly to get your Failover Cluster running in no time.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    • Anyone with a large disk (VMDK) knows the issues of VMware snapshots. Most backup software is a "point in time backup" that uses snapshots. While the backup can be run multiple times per day the stress of the snapshot on the host and storage is eliminated by the continuous protection of Zerto log replication.
    • A client had a the disks on a VM go missing for some reason. We had them "flip the switch" for a real fail over and press the fail over button. The VM on our DR site started to come alive as the VM at the customer site was brought down. When the DR VM was fully up, automatic reverse replication started. The DR machine was available in a few minutes (to take into account different host hardware) for access. One the vm at both sites were in sync, we had the customer again repeat the fail over process and the DR site VM was turned off and the Production site VM was brought back on line. This was a 200 GB VM and the whole process was finished in about 3 hours.
    • Zerto also allows for "Test" fail overs that can be configured on many different functions, such as host, datastore, network and IP usage. Configuring the IPs is crucial to avoid inadvertent site cross contamination of the same VM.
    • Zerto can also retrieve files from any VM disk on the DR site without starting a VM. Very handy for retrieving files or directories.
    • Since Zerto is running continuous log replication, changes on the production VM are nearly instantaneously copied to the DR site. As with any data process, having sufficient bandwidth for "churn" peaks minimizes the delay in updating the DR site.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Microsoft
    • The setup of the Windows Server Failover Clustering is complex, requiring different networks and multiple network cards.
    • Better integration between the Windows Failover clustering and Hyper-V. Unlike VMWare you have to make changes to two places instead of just one panel.
    • I wish there was a web portal to manage the cluster. Instead you have to remote desktop into the VIP address and go to the Cluster manager.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    • Moving a VM from one protection group to another could be simplified.
    • I would like to see an executive-style report of recovery and testing for upper management.
    • The ability to deploy Zerto as a virtual appliance, without the need for a windows server.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Microsoft
    It has proven its value to us both for maintaining SLAs and providing the ability to perform much needed and regular systems maintenance without taking applications offline for more than a few seconds.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    We really like the easy setup of this replication solution, as well as the ease of management. Not to mention, our internal IT Economist determined that the Zerto solution would provide the best ROI out of the competing solutions we analyzed. So far, his calculations have been spot on, and we have saved substantially
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    Microsoft
    Usability of Failover Clustering on Windows Server is generally good. Failover Clustering console is not hard to understand if the complexity of the product is taken into account. Most of the task on the Cluster can be done via PowerShell, so automation is possible and not hard (PowerShell is very intuitive). Configuring storage is the hardest and most confusing task during cluster configuration, so storage configuration should be planned in advance. Cluster Validation Wizard is verbose but most of the errors are easy to understand.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    Zerto is very easy to implement and support. Uses are broad, only issues are once something doesn't sync it is difficult to get assistance until your reach tier 2 or tier 3 support. Basic file and folder recovery is great. Live and test fail overs are also easy to implement without issue.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Microsoft
    Online documentation is excellent. Everything I needed to know, I learned from the online documentation. I haven't used phone support as I haven't needed to but would presume it is similar to Microsoft Support for other products that I've used. Phone support from Microsoft is hit and miss. It depends on who you get. That said, my rating is based on the online documentation.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    Overall support is very good. We sometimes get pushback when asking Level 1 support to escalate to Level 2. This causes undue frustrations when you need a more knowledgeable support person to get involved. We've had to escalate to account reps a few times for this scenario. Zerto is very responsive and normally handles our requests very quickly.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Implementation Rating
    Microsoft
    No answers on this topic
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    Make sure the end goal is in mind before implementing. That way results meet expectations.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Microsoft
    Both VMware and Microsoft Failover do the job and they both do it extremely well. For many bussiness and environments though, they will have the existing investment in a Microsoft environment and Microsoft infrastructure. The introduction of VMware will or may achieve the end result however it introduces new dimensions like support, licensing, documentation and ensuring the support team are trained.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    We started out using Backup Exec which was in service until we virtualized our environment where it didn't perform as well at the time. Then we switched to Veeam which worked well, but then as we started needing to do migrations and off-site DR, we found ourselves relying on Zerto more often.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Contract Terms and Pricing Model
    Microsoft
    No answers on this topic
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    For my organization, the pricing model was an upfront investment for the Zerto licenses. My organization prefers to pay upfront and not deal with month-to-month or year-to-year pricing models that most companies are moving to. But for some, the investment may be more than they can afford, and would prefer the year-to-year pricing model.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Professional Services
    Microsoft
    No answers on this topic
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    I mean, it was 6 years ago, but we were up and going with all applications synchronizing in short order. The longest tasks was getting the 30 TB of application data synchronized between the datacenters.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Microsoft
    • Failover Cluster gives us the power to do updates or hardware upgrade / change without having to create an outage. Which permit us not to work night shifts.
    • By creating one cluster with all Hyper-V servers, it enabled us to move VMs via live migration between host to balance RAM usage which was time consuming and took a lot of time over network before.
    • It created some problems that caused us to have to investigate quite some time before finding the cause. We encountered dll locking that caused the Failover Cluster to force-restart a host. Logs are really not the strong point of Failover Cluster Manager, and even Microsoft Support wasn't able to help much. We had to find the problem ourself.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)
    • Zerto is like having the best possible insurance ... it just works, and often provides the backups taken overnight that are key in recovering data/work between overnight backups.
    • Zerto easily enabled the move of primary datacenters by allowing easy failover to a secondary site, and failback to the primary site.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots

    HPE Zerto Software Screenshots

    Product screenshotProduct screenshotScreenshot of AnalyticsScreenshot of DashboardScreenshot of Failover TestScreenshot of vSphere