# What IT resilience orchestration tools best streamline automation for enterprise infrastructure resilience?

<p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">I want to understand which platforms take the manual effort out of keeping enterprise infrastructure resilient, from failover to recovery runbooks, so the process runs consistently instead of depending on someone remembering the steps. The three that come up most for that are Veeam Data Platform, Zerto, and Cutover, picks from the <a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/categories/it-resilience-orchestration-automation-itro">IT Resilience Orchestration Automation (ITRO)</a> category.</p><ul>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/veeam-data-platform/reviews"><strong>Veeam Data Platform</strong></a> (4.6 stars, 724 reviews) - reviewers point to built-in automation, monitoring, and orchestrated, verifiable recovery across virtual, physical, and cloud from one console, with instant recovery that several say cuts recovery times from hours to well under an hour. The trade-off they raise is complex licensing and some operational overhead in larger environments.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/zerto/reviews"><strong>Zerto</strong></a> (4.7 stars, 75 reviews) - a recurring theme is near-zero replication paired with orchestrated failover and one-click DR testing, with reviewers describing quarterly DR tests that once took days now finishing in a day. Journal storage growth is the caveat to plan for.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/cutover/reviews"><strong>Cutover</strong></a> (4.3 stars, 28 reviews) - this is orchestration in the purest sense: dynamic runbooks that automate and coordinate DR execution across teams, integrating with tools like Ansible and ServiceNow. Reviewers report meaningful recovery-time reductions by removing manual execution risk, though it coordinates recovery rather than being the replication engine itself.</li>
<li>
<a class="a a--md" elv="true" href="https://www.g2.com/products/vmware-live-recovery-vlr/reviews"><strong>VMware Live Recovery (VLR)</strong></a> (4.5 stars, 136 reviews) - reviewers highlight agentless, vSphere-native orchestrated failover and failback with non-disruptive testing, a strong fit if your enterprise estate is heavily VMware. It's tightly coupled to vSphere, so it fits that world best.</li>
</ul><p class="elv-tracking-normal elv-text-default elv-font-figtree elv-text-base elv-leading-base elv-font-normal" elv="true">If you're optimizing for automation, are you looking to automate the recovery engine itself, or the runbook and coordination around it? And how standardized is your infrastructure, mostly VMware or genuinely mixed?</p>

##### Post Metadata
- Posted at: 2 months ago
- Author title: Marketer
- Net upvotes: 1


## Comments
### Comment 1

&lt;p&gt;I’d measure the automation by how many human decisions remain during an unannounced recovery test. A documented runbook can look highly automated until an actual failure requires someone to choose sequencing, validate dependencies, or approve the next step. Tracking every manual intervention during a drill would show whether orchestration is genuinely reducing recovery risk or just making the happy path faster.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 15 days ago
- Author title: Writer



### Comment 2

&lt;p&gt;For a mixed enterprise environment, I’d prioritize automating the runbook and coordination layer first, because that’s where manual errors tend to creep in. If the estate is mostly VMware, though, a more tightly integrated recovery engine like VLR or Zerto can simplify both execution and testing.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 16 days ago
- Author title: Marketer



### Comment 3

&lt;p&gt;Worth adding that the answer often changes after the first real test rather than during selection. Teams tend to assume replication is the risky part and then find the delay was waiting for someone to confirm a step at 3am. Cutover sitting purely in the coordination layer makes sense in that light, since it targets the part that doesn&#39;t show up on an architecture diagram.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: 17 days ago
- Author title: Tech Consultant



### Comment 4

&lt;p&gt;The best fit depends on whether resilience risk sits in the infrastructure itself or in the manual execution surrounding recovery.&lt;/p&gt;

##### Comment Metadata
- Posted at: about 2 months ago
- Author title: Marketing Executive





## Related discussions
- [How well does Trello scale into a larger team?](https://www.g2.com/discussions/1-how-well-does-trello-scale-into-a-larger-team)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 6
- [Can we please add a new section](https://www.g2.com/discussions/2-can-we-please-add-a-new-section)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 0
- [Quantifiable benefits from implementing your CRM](https://www.g2.com/discussions/quantifiable-benefits-from-implementing-your-crm)
  - Posted at: over 13 years ago
  - Comments: 4