NetApp Backup and Recovery

Name: NetApp Backup and Recovery
Brand: NetApp
Rating: 4.1 (52 reviews)

Leader

Making your data infrastructure more seamless, more dynamic, and higher performing than ever before.

Est 1992|Valuation $42.3B|Raised $6.6B

LinkedIn 782K|Website|Web traffic 856K|FTEs 11,700|HQ San Jose, California, US

MarketsBackup and Data Protection

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

NetApp vs Veeam - NetApp advantage: storage-native block-level backup for ONTAP volumes without requiring dedicated backup-server architectures; efficient on-array mechanisms. - Veeam advantage: broader VM-level restore tooling and a mature ecosystem; many NetApp customers use Veeam alongside NetApp snapshot capabilities. - Market signal: community reports include migrations from NetApp-native backup back to Veeam for reasons including cost and feature completeness. NetApp vs Commvault - NetApp advantage: ONTAP-aligned workflows and potentially leaner operations for ONTAP-only scopes. - Commvault advantage: broad enterprise coverage across many sources and targets; mature feature set for heterogeneous estates. - Tradeoff: Commvault can be complex to operate, but provides extensive platform coverage. Rubrik/Cohesity (appliance/SaaS platforms) - Typical buyer priorities for Rubrik/Cohesity include turnkey ransomware recovery workflows, unified policy and immutability features, and simplified operations. Drawbacks cited in the market include cost and platform lock-in for some buyers.

Market share/adoption trends (evidence limitations)

Third-party market estimators suggest NetApp Cloud Backup is a smaller player in the broad backup market compared with some long-standing vendors. Such estimates are directional and methodology-dependent and should be treated as low-confidence evidence.

	NetApp Backup and Recovery	Veeam Data Platform	Commvault Cloud
Starting Price	Published metered per-GB PAYGO pricing available from the vendor (service charge; storage costs separate)	Typically quote-based; licensing varies by edition and workload	Typically quote-based; capacity/workload licensing varies
Recommended Scope	ONTAP-first environments seeking storage-native backup-to-object with a unified control plane	Virtualization-heavy environments (VMware/Hyper-V) and broader infrastructure backup with strong restore tooling	Large enterprises requiring broad coverage, policy depth, and heterogeneous storage support
Key Strength	Tight ONTAP integration, incremental-forever, Snapshot/SnapMirror + object backup orchestration, immutability options	Mature operational workflows, ecosystem, restore verification/testing, broad adoption	Feature richness for heterogeneous environments, governance and compliance features
Key Limitation	Less compelling as a universal backup platform; community reports of operational issues and cost sensitivity due to metering and cloud/API costs	Licensing/pricing complexity in some scenarios; repository infrastructure may be required	Complexity and administrative overhead are common complaints

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative competitive analysis

NetApp vs Veeam

NetApp advantage: storage-native block-level backup for ONTAP volumes without requiring dedicated backup-server architectures; efficient on-array mechanisms.
Veeam advantage: broader VM-level restore tooling and a mature ecosystem; many NetApp customers use Veeam alongside NetApp snapshot capabilities.
Market signal: community reports include migrations from NetApp-native backup back to Veeam for reasons including cost and feature completeness.

NetApp vs Commvault

NetApp advantage: ONTAP-aligned workflows and potentially leaner operations for ONTAP-only scopes.
Commvault advantage: broad enterprise coverage across many sources and targets; mature feature set for heterogeneous estates.
Tradeoff: Commvault can be complex to operate, but provides extensive platform coverage.

Rubrik/Cohesity (appliance/SaaS platforms)

Typical buyer priorities for Rubrik/Cohesity include turnkey ransomware recovery workflows, unified policy and immutability features, and simplified operations. Drawbacks cited in the market include cost and platform lock-in for some buyers.

Market share/adoption trends (evidence limitations)

	NetApp Backup and Recovery	Veeam Data Platform	Commvault Cloud
Starting Price	Published metered per-GB PAYGO pricing available from the vendor (service charge; storage costs separate)	Typically quote-based; licensing varies by edition and workload	Typically quote-based; capacity/workload licensing varies
Recommended Scope	ONTAP-first environments seeking storage-native backup-to-object with a unified control plane	Virtualization-heavy environments (VMware/Hyper-V) and broader infrastructure backup with strong restore tooling	Large enterprises requiring broad coverage, policy depth, and heterogeneous storage support
Key Strength	Tight ONTAP integration, incremental-forever, Snapshot/SnapMirror + object backup orchestration, immutability options	Mature operational workflows, ecosystem, restore verification/testing, broad adoption	Feature richness for heterogeneous environments, governance and compliance features
Key Limitation	Less compelling as a universal backup platform; community reports of operational issues and cost sensitivity due to metering and cloud/API costs	Licensing/pricing complexity in some scenarios; repository infrastructure may be required	Complexity and administrative overhead are common complaints