Is Rook or UrBackup better?

Neither clearly leads. Rook starts at Free and UrBackup at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.

Which is cheaper, Rook or UrBackup?

Rook starts at Free and UrBackup at Free.

Does Rook or UrBackup run on more platforms?

Rook runs on Linux, Kubernetes. UrBackup runs on Linux, Windows, macOS, FreeBSD.

Can I use Rook for free?

Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.

What is Rook best used for?

Rook is most often used for an on-premises kubernetes platform needing block, shared filesystem and s3 storage without buying three products, a team that already runs ceph and wants its lifecycle managed declaratively inside kubernetes, a large cluster where three-way replication overhead is unaffordable and erasure coding is required, an organisation building a private cloud that cannot use managed cloud storage services for residency reasons. Of those, an on-premises kubernetes platform needing block, shared filesystem and s3 storage without buying three products and a team that already runs ceph and wants its lifecycle managed declaratively inside kubernetes are not what UrBackup is typically brought in for.

What can Rook do that UrBackup cannot?

Rook covers Ceph operator, Block, file and object, Erasure coding, CSI driver. UrBackup covers Windows image backups, File backups, Web interface, Client discovery.

Cloud · head to head

Rook vs UrBackup

Rook

Cloud

Kubernetes operator that deploys and manages Ceph storage clusters

From: Free
Rated: -

Full review Website

UrBackup

Backup

Open source client server backup doing both file and whole disk image backups of Windows machines

From: Free
Rated: -

Full review Website

The short version

Each has a real cost: Rook rook automates Ceph but does not abstract it, so an incident still demands Ceph expertise, and organisations without it end up hiring consultants at exactly the wrong moment.; UrBackup backups are stored on the server without encryption at rest by default, so the backup server holds a readable copy of every machine it protects and becomes the highest value target on the network.
They diverge on capability: Rook covers Ceph operator, UrBackup covers Windows image backups.
Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Rook and UrBackup actually diverge.

Attributes where Rook and UrBackup differ
Attribute	Rook	UrBackup
Platforms	Linux, Kubernetes	Linux, Windows, macOS, FreeBSD
Category	Cloud	Backup

Identical on both: starting price (Free), pricing model (Open source, no licence fee), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Rook

Ceph operator
Block, file and object
Erasure coding
CSI driver
Automated upgrades
Multi-cluster mirroring

Only in UrBackup

Windows image backups
File backups
Web interface
Client discovery
Internet mode
Filesystem deduplication

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Rook

An on-premises Kubernetes platform needing block, shared filesystem and S3 storage without buying three productsnot UrBackup
A team that already runs Ceph and wants its lifecycle managed declaratively inside Kubernetesnot UrBackup
A large cluster where three-way replication overhead is unaffordable and erasure coding is requirednot UrBackup
An organisation building a private cloud that cannot use managed cloud storage services for residency reasonsnot UrBackup

UrBackup

A small office with Windows workstations that needs bare metal restore without per seat licensingnot Rook
Schools and labs where machines are re-imaged often and a known good image must be recoverablenot Rook
Backing up a mixed fleet to one server on premises with a web interface non specialists can usenot Rook
Replacing an expiring commercial endpoint backup licence where the budget is the constraintnot Rook

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Rook

Rook automates Ceph but does not abstract it, so an incident still demands Ceph expertise, and organisations without it end up hiring consultants at exactly the wrong moment.
There is no vendor and no SLA; the realistic commercial support routes are IBM Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation or an independent Ceph consultancy, both of which change the cost picture entirely.
Ceph is resource hungry, needing substantial memory and dedicated disks per OSD, so the hardware cost of a properly sized cluster is often underestimated.
Recovery and rebalancing after a disk or node failure generates heavy background input and output that can degrade application performance for hours, which surprises teams sizing for steady state.
Minimum viable clusters require several nodes with several disks each, so it is impractical at small scale and the entry hardware cost exceeds simpler alternatives.

UrBackup

Backups are stored on the server without encryption at rest by default, so the backup server holds a readable copy of every machine it protects and becomes the highest value target on the network.
Deduplication relies on filesystem features such as hard links, btrfs or ZFS, so a server built on the wrong filesystem silently consumes far more space and the fix is a rebuild rather than a setting.
There is no native object storage target, so offsite copies mean replicating the server storage with another tool rather than backing up to a bucket directly.
Restoring a full Windows image requires booting a restore environment, which is a manual, on site procedure that needs to be rehearsed before the day it is needed.
A single server holds everything and there is no built in clustering, so its own failure removes every recovery point at once unless you have separately solved replication.

Pricing, plan by plan

Rook

Free

RookFree
- Apache 2.0 licensed, no licence fee
- Graduated CNCF project
- Community support via GitHub and Slack only

UrBackup

Free

UrBackupFree
- Full functionality, unlimited clients
- File and image backups
- Web administration interface

Which should you pick?

Choose Rook if

You need ceph operator.
You want to start without paying.
You work on Linux, Kubernetes.
You also want block, file and object.

Rook review

Choose UrBackup if

You need windows image backups.
You want to start without paying.
You work on Linux, Windows, macOS, FreeBSD.
You also want file backups.

UrBackup review

Questions people ask

Is Rook or UrBackup better?: Neither clearly leads. Rook starts at Free and UrBackup at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Rook or UrBackup?: Rook starts at Free and UrBackup at Free.
Does Rook or UrBackup run on more platforms?: Rook runs on Linux, Kubernetes. UrBackup runs on Linux, Windows, macOS, FreeBSD.
Can I use Rook for free?: Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Rook best used for?: Rook is most often used for an on-premises kubernetes platform needing block, shared filesystem and s3 storage without buying three products, a team that already runs ceph and wants its lifecycle managed declaratively inside kubernetes, a large cluster where three-way replication overhead is unaffordable and erasure coding is required, an organisation building a private cloud that cannot use managed cloud storage services for residency reasons. Of those, an on-premises kubernetes platform needing block, shared filesystem and s3 storage without buying three products and a team that already runs ceph and wants its lifecycle managed declaratively inside kubernetes are not what UrBackup is typically brought in for.
What can Rook do that UrBackup cannot?: Rook covers Ceph operator, Block, file and object, Erasure coding, CSI driver. UrBackup covers Windows image backups, File backups, Web interface, Client discovery.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Rook: Who supports it in production?

Nobody by default. IBM sells Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation, which is supported Rook and Ceph, and independent consultancies sell Ceph support. Decide this before deployment.

UrBackup: Does it back up Linux servers as well?

File backups yes, image backups no. The image path is Windows only through volume shadow copy.

Rook: Does it need Ceph knowledge?

Yes. Rook handles deployment and routine operations, but troubleshooting a degraded cluster is a Ceph skill and there is no way around it.

UrBackup: Is the data encrypted?

Transport can be encrypted, and there is optional client side file encryption, but the default server storage is not encrypted at rest. Use full disk encryption on the server.

Rook: Can it replace an object storage appliance?

Functionally yes, through the RADOS gateway, but you take on the operations that an appliance vendor would otherwise carry.

UrBackup: Can I back up to Amazon S3?

Not directly. The server writes to local or mounted storage, so cloud copies are made by replicating that storage separately.

UrBackup: How many clients can one server handle?

Dozens is routine on decent hardware. The limit is usually storage input and output during overlapping backup windows rather than client count.

Rook vs UrBackup

Rook

UrBackup

The short version

Where they differ

What each one covers

Only in Rook

Only in UrBackup

What people use each for

Rook

UrBackup

Where each one falls short

Rook

UrBackup

Pricing, plan by plan

Rook

UrBackup

Which should you pick?

Choose Rook if

Choose UrBackup if

Questions people ask

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Related pages

More on Rook

More on UrBackup

Keep looking

Other head to heads