Cohesity vs. Commvault

Prevention and detection of malicious activity: Modern data immutability/WORM, 2FA/TOTP, VM vulnerability detection, ML-driven anomaly detection, one-click, industry-leading threat protection and data classification

Windows-based single point of failure: CommServe runs mainly on Windows (limited Linux deployments);requires complex DR process to avoid metadata loss, resulting in unusable backups

Single, simple, and secure UI across all services: Simple to use web-based UI; ability to administer all jobs and consumption models— including aaS offerings; built from the ground up to be secure

Multiple UIs required: Command Center and legacy, Java-based CommCell Console (for advanced tasks); inconsistent experience and output across interfaces

Protection for in-progress backups: Closed API/RPC protocols for adapters; adapterless dump-to-NAS workflows supporting NFSv4.1 ACLs to protect from exfiltration or sabotage

Higher risk of data loss: Lower uptime/resiliency with long backups and extended upgrade windows potentially leading to less frequent backups and missed backups, requiring frustrating and time-consuming troubleshooting

Strict access control and bank-grade cyber vaulting: Immutability,Cohesity-managed key option; quorum-controlled operations, rapid restore, and time-limited network access (reducing attack surface)

Greater risk of rogue actions: Limited quorum controls requiring installation of non-default business logic workflows to provide additional approvals for few tasks

Get back to business fast: Resume NAS file sharing immediately without restore and/or rapidly restore to primary storage

Files offline longer: Can’t immediately put file shares online; slow restore to primary storage, especially for large NAS data sets

React rapidly to attacks: Simple closed-loop SIEM, SOAR integration; complete incident response within Palo Alto XSOAR, Cisco SecureX, Microsoft Sentinel, or CrowdStrike

Delayed response: SOAR integrations lacking for incident response and resolution

Restore production and populate recovery sandboxes faster: Immediate and scalable restore of VMs and databases for faster forensics, sandboxing, and recovery

Slower recovery: Requires chain-based snapshots for synthetic fulls; limited live mounts and slow cache population

Production-grade I/O reliability: Protected data and uninterrupted instant recovery

Risk of crash: VMs can’t stay mounted through MediaAgent loss or reboot

Speedier data reuse: Rapidly restore to get data immediately for dev/test or analytics

Slow and limited access to data: Inefficient live mount snapshots can bring up only a few VMs or databases

Data masking: Anonymize sensitive information before it leaves the backup repository

Potential PII exposure: Rudimentary internal masking destroys relationships: not useful for analytics

Single secure data management platform: Enable multiple use cases, including file & object services, DR, and copy data management with reduced attack surface

Just a backup: Traditional single-purpose architecture requiring additional silos for use cases beyond backup and recovery

Free up staff time: Modern, easy, and powerful management with a single UI and automated optimization, non-disruptive upgrades, and easy patch management

Labor intensive: Legacy architecture requiring multiple UIs and frequent monitoring and troubleshooting with painful patch and upgrade management

> 30% more space efficient than Commvault, including across cloud: Typical for most workloads due to superior sliding-window dedupe, Zstd compression¹

> 43% more space required than Cohesity: Inefficient, large fixed block deduplication (128kb on-prem and 512kb in cloud); limited dedupe across source types

Efficient network utilization: Lower network bandwidth utilization for replication/archive, reducing cost of using cloud-based backup targets

Higher network traffic: Inefficient deduplication creating more bandwidth usage, especially when moving data to the cloud