Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Microsoft Azure File Storage vs Wasabi comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 1, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft Azure File Storage
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Wasabi
Ranking in Public Cloud Storage Services
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Public Cloud Storage Services category, the mindshare of Microsoft Azure File Storage is 10.0%, down from 13.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Wasabi is 6.4%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Public Cloud Storage Services
 

Featured Reviews

PrashanthR - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamlessly streamlines document processing with advanced file storage and OCR integration
We need to store data over there. We process documents through Kofax Time is a major benefit, as well as ease of processing. With configuration, it happens quite easily, and we can finish tasks early. File storage is complemented by OCR with Azure Cognitive Service. This enhances the processing…
DavidWork - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers reliable and cost-effective backups with impressive stability
We use Wasabi to back up all of our WordPress sites. Anytime we have a new website, it's just easy to add it The cost is low, it is foolproof, and it has redundancy. We have never had an outage, and it is very reliable and stable. Since it is so inexpensive, it does not impact our profit…

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It was quick to synchronize back from Azure to the on-premise server."
"The interface is very good."
"Azure File Storage gives us easy access to cloud solutions at the storage level."
"The most valuable aspect of Azure File Storage is that all the features are available in one place."
"General user familiarity with Office 365 products make adopting this solution easy to adopt in production."
"Implementing Microsoft Azure has meant that we are using the same solution as our customers who use Azure Public Cloud. This allows us to integrate our application, as well as provide the solution to them."
"What I like about Microsoft Azure File Storage is its convenience for customers, cost-effectiveness, and high availability."
"The solution is user-friendly and integrates easily with web apps."
"Overall, I would rate Wasabi a ten out of ten."
"Wasabi's simplified pricing model is phenomenal in helping our organization predict and manage cloud costs."
"The cost is low, it is foolproof, and it has redundancy."
"Basically, I set Wasabi up and forget it. I'll monitor it every once in a while just to make sure that it's working correctly."
"Wasabi is an easy-to-use solution."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The tool is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of Wasabi is the backups."
 

Cons

"The initial setup is complex. Unless you have done it a few times it, it is going to be hard."
"There is room for improvement in helping customers understand and integrate Azure File Storage into their operations."
"The product name keeps changing. It can be confusing when product names change frequently, especially with Microsoft. Sometimes, if you refer to a product by a certain name last year, it might have a different name six months later."
"Microsoft Azure File Storage should improve its pricing."
"It's not very intuitive."
"The solution should support all the legacy storage systems."
"Considering the enterprise licensing required for the solution, the cost of the solution is an area where the product needs improvement."
"The support could improve."
"The scalability could be improved."
"I don't have enough experience to understand the nuances of where they might improve."
"The scalability could improve."
"The solution must allow the extension of the retention period."
"The solution’s user reporting could be improved."
"The most important improvement we would like to see in Wasabi is the ability to find files and folders easily on the platform, as it is not very easy at all right now."
"Having the ability to upload and download data using third-party apps such as Mega which can sync to the desktop would be excellent."
"Wasabi could be cheaper."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing cost for Microsoft Azure File Storage comes with an agreement from Microsoft."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with ten being the most expensive. It's not cheap."
"One of the major benefits for AWS is that they have a very large customer representative base where clients can be picked from, they offer large discounts and credit. We were not able to receive the same kind of offers from Microsoft Azure File Storage. We tried to approach Azure while hiring for our disaster recovery discussion, but we didn't receive anything from Azure."
"For one terabyte of data, we are spending about 150 Euro every month."
"We pay for both yearly and monthly licenses. The yearly one is cheaper than the monthly one."
"The solution is a bit pricey compared to AWS and Google."
"Microsoft Azure File Storage is expensive."
"There are fewer hidden costs involved compared to other solutions, and when our customer is already a Microsoft partner, they typically have access to more affordable fees."
"The price of the solution is inexpensive."
"The tool’s price is very reasonable."
"Wasabi is a cheap solution, and users have to pay for a monthly license."
"The price is reasonable."
"Wasabi has better pricing than Nutanix."
"I can only tell you that Wasabi costs about half what Amazon Web Services is charging. Now, the cost per month is a more difficult question. That varies depending on the capacity, the services you're employing, and that type of thing."
"Wasabi is a cost-effective solution for data storage, priced at just under six dollars per terabyte."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Public Cloud Storage Services solutions are best for your needs.
856,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which file storage system is better - Amazon EFS (elastic file storage) or Azure File Storage?
Amazon EFS is easy to set up: you can use the AWS management console, API, or command-line. Amazon EFS can grow to petabytes and deliver consistent low latencies and high levels of throughput. This...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure File Storage?
The pricing for Microsoft Azure File Storage is five out of ten, not so expensive and not so low.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Wasabi?
We can reserve capacities based on our usage expectations for two to three years. We can pay for it annually. It is quite easy for the organization. The pricing model is quite affordable. The price...
What needs improvement with Wasabi?
Wasabi could be cheaper, however, it is already really cheap, so I cannot say if there is anything specific that would be an improvement.
 

Also Known As

MS Azure File Storage
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Talon, Camden
FileShadow, Ivy League Schools, Russell Sage Colleges, Northeast Wisconsin Technical College, MayStreet
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Azure File Storage vs. Wasabi and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
856,807 professionals have used our research since 2012.