VMware's SRM vs. Amazon AWS Disaster Recovery (DR)

We have clients using

1. Traditional VMware SRM (good pedigree, complicated to setup), it was the first!

2. Zerto (newish kid on the block, cheaper less complicated, winning lots of ground and market share over VMware, very good.

3. Amazon AWS

4. Microsoft Azure

 3 & 4 and relatively newcomers to the DR failover seen

and then you've got Veeam Backup and Replication, once seen as poor man's DR, but not so anymore, and Nakivo Backup and Replication.

Most require a recovery site for DR, so do you have one already, if you do not have one already, then you can look at how Azure and AWS are, because do you not need your own infrastructure, e.g. SAN, Networking and Hosts.

BUT, can you easily get you data back, when migrating it off premise.

Not sure what you mean by "more efficient".

THEY ALL WORK, e.g. hit the button, and you've failed over, some of our clients do not like Cloud Hosting, do not like AWS, Azure, and consumer rated hosting, you need to check those details, and see if you are happy with their security and governance.

Some clients want to keep their data in their own datacentres.

So the argument, comes down to Hosted or On-Premise Disaster Recovery.

Thanks Andrew.

By "more efficient", I meant less costly and easier to setup. Not sure if it is true -- for AWS.
We do have a disaster recovery site, but server hardware is not yet in place. Routers and switches are there, being used by other projects.

Quotes given to our educational organization by Zerto are in fact higher than what we are getting for SRM.

Can anyone give an opinion about the cost of AWS. Thanks.

Let me ask you 1 more question?

1. Do you have a DR site, and infrastructure, networking, building, AirCon (HVAC), SAN and Hosts ?

Yes or No ?