NAKIVO vs Acronis Cyber Protect: VM Backup Depth vs Security Bundle (2026)

Comparing NAKIVO to Acronis is a category mismatch that's worth naming up front. NAKIVO Backup & Replication is a backup platform. Acronis Cyber Protect Cloud is a multi-function security + backup suite that includes backup as one of several capabilities alongside anti-malware, patch management, vulnerability scanning, and endpoint protection.

Both will back up your customer's VMs. The question is whether the backup product should also be the EDR, the patching tool, and the vulnerability scanner, or whether those should be separate best-of-breed tools with a focused backup product.

We distribute NAKIVO because the backup-specialist model fits the way most Australian MSPs actually operate: separate tools for security (ThreatLocker, Huntress, SentinelOne), separate tools for patching (Datto RMM, Intune, Automox), and a focused backup platform that does backup exceptionally well. Acronis makes sense for a different operating model, typically smaller MSPs who want fewer vendors, fewer agents, and one bill.

For pure backup and replication features, NAKIVO has the deeper product. Concrete examples:

Replication. NAKIVO has VM-level replication to a remote site with configurable RPOs, network failover, and automated test failover. Acronis DRaaS is respectable but relies on Acronis Cloud rather than customer-defined replication targets.

Proxmox VE support. NAKIVO added Proxmox backup ahead of most of the competition. Acronis does not currently support Proxmox natively. For partners migrating customers off VMware to Proxmox (which is happening at scale in 2026), this is a material gap.

Granular recovery. NAKIVO recovers individual files, application objects (Exchange mailboxes, SharePoint sites, SQL databases, Active Directory objects), and entire VMs from the same backup. The granularity is the equal of anything on the market. Acronis has similar capabilities but the depth and the number of application-aware recovery workflows is less.

NAS backup. NAKIVO backs up NAS devices (Synology, QNAP, generic SMB/NFS) natively. Acronis covers NAS but less deeply.

For a practice whose backup tool needs to earn its keep on backup features alone, NAKIVO is the stronger product. For a practice where backup is one line in a multi-function security tool, Acronis's bundle approach may outweigh the backup-depth gap.

Acronis's pitch is agent consolidation. One install covers backup, anti-malware, patch, vulnerability, and endpoint. For small MSPs running 50-300 endpoints across a handful of customers, collapsing five tools into one materially reduces complexity: one agent rollout, one dashboard, one support contract, one renewal.

Acronis's active-protection anti-malware does genuinely useful things around ransomware: it can detect encryption patterns in real time and restore encrypted files from backup automatically. The integration between the anti-malware and the backup engine is where the bundle earns its money, each component is less than best-of-breed, but together they create a tighter ransomware-response loop than stitching separate tools together.

For MSPs who have already invested in best-of-breed EDR (CrowdStrike, SentinelOne, Huntress), best-of-breed patching (Automox, Intune, Datto RMM), and best-of-breed vulnerability scanning (Rapid7, Tenable), the Acronis bundle is less compelling because they're paying for capabilities they already have. For MSPs who haven't made those investments yet, the bundle is a legitimate way to stand up a full security + backup stack quickly.

Both products offer per-workload subscription licensing suitable for MSPs. The shapes differ.

NAKIVO MSP Edition bills monthly per protected workload (VM, M365 user, TB of physical), no commits, no minimums. The floor price for hypervisor VMs is under AUD 2 per workload per month. Microsoft 365 is per-user per-month. Everything is a line item.

Acronis Cyber Protect Cloud bundles the backup with the security features, so the per-workload price is higher but covers more. For a customer that would otherwise pay separately for EDR (~AUD 10-15/endpoint/month), patching (~AUD 3-5/endpoint/month), and backup (~AUD 5-10/endpoint/month), the Acronis bundle at around AUD 15-25/endpoint/month can come out cheaper.

The honest answer on TCO: neither product is universally cheaper, it depends on what you're comparing against. If you're comparing Acronis against NAKIVO + separate EDR + separate patching, Acronis usually wins on total cost. If you're comparing Acronis against NAKIVO alone (because the customer already has EDR and patching), NAKIVO wins.

Choose NAKIVO when:

• Backup is a dedicated line item in your service offering, not bundled with security.
• Your customers already have EDR, patching, and vulnerability tools.
• You need Proxmox VE backup.
• VM replication (not just backup) is part of the DR requirement.
• You're running mixed hypervisors (VMware + Hyper-V + Proxmox) and want one tool.

Choose Acronis when:

• You want to consolidate endpoint security, patching, and backup into a single agent.
• You're a smaller MSP with simpler tool stacks and value single-vendor simplicity.
• Your customer base is primarily Windows endpoints rather than VM estates.
• The integrated ransomware response (active-protection + auto-restore) is a selling feature for your customers.