ShareGate vs. VMware Cloud Director

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
ShareGate
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
ShareGate is an Microsoft 365 migration and governance platform that focuses on simplicity, boasting over 100,000 IT pros as users.
$1,995
per year
VMware Cloud Director
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
VMware Cloud Director (formerly vCloud Director) is a cloud service-delivery platform used by cloud providers to operate and manage cloud-service businesses. The vendor states that by using VMware Cloud Director, cloud providers deliver secure, efficient, and elastic cloud resources to thousands of enterprises and IT teams across the world.N/A
Pricing
ShareGateVMware Cloud Director
Editions & Modules
ShareGate Protect
$1995
per year
Migrate Essentials
$5,995
per year 1 machine activation for essential migrations
Migrate Pro
$9,995
per year 5 machine activation for essential migrations
Migrate Enterprise
$17,995
per year 25 machine activation for essential migrations
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ShareGateVMware Cloud Director
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ShareGateVMware Cloud Director
Considered Both Products
ShareGate
Chose ShareGate
Simplest tool out of all and more affordable. Better support and documentation. More users and great prompt support. Prior to starting a new task time estimate should be provided. The license system is more manageable however should be available for more or less users rather …
Chose ShareGate
Sharegate is superior in most ways except teams sites migration to GCC high tenant. It’s not possible with Sharegate but abitTitan can somewhat migrate teams to GCC high tenants. I wish MS would make available the Graph for GCC so we can utilize Sharegate Team migration tools! …
Chose ShareGate
Cost prohibitive since it's based on size migrated and rather expensive. However, the feature-set is VERY good and has some things ShareGate doesn't.
VMware Cloud Director
Chose VMware Cloud Director
Another option was own scripting or maintaining the end users in the backend (vcenter). This costs to much time to maintain (scripting) and has a big change of a Security breach. It was not an option for us either way.
Chose VMware Cloud Director
Hyper-V is built on a Windows platform that includes services not needed for the virtual environment adding overhead. With vCloud I'm not required to maintain a host OS or it's updates. The requirement to maintain storage devices is no longer needed with vCloud as well.
Chose VMware Cloud Director
vCloud Director is definitely my favorite as far as cloud managers. The only thing that compares is Cisco UCS Director, but it has slightly different functionality and purpose. I understand why a lot of clients still go with vCloud Director even though VMware intends to sunset …
Best Alternatives
ShareGateVMware Cloud Director
Small Businesses
VMware Cloud Director
VMware Cloud Director
Score 8.5 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
IBM Cloud for VMware Solutions
IBM Cloud for VMware Solutions
Score 7.0 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Enterprises
VMware Cloud Director
VMware Cloud Director
Score 8.5 out of 10

No answers on this topic

All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ShareGateVMware Cloud Director
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
ShareGateVMware Cloud Director
Likelihood to Recommend
It's great for all kinds of migrations big and small. The reports are also very usefull and the MS Teams administration options are a bonus. It's file/networkdrive migration options could be completere but they work. I hope ShareGate will invest some more effort in to that feature. ShareGate is quite complete as it is right now.
Read full review
For a CSP it's the best choice. For internal uses, even in presence of different business units, it's not so easy and flexible to manage. It assures a high level of multitenancy, often not needed for internal purposes. But it could be used in this case, just not created for these purposes. Network management is great.
Read full review
Pros
  • Migrating Sites and data on harddrives to SharePoint
  • Copying all kinds of SharePoint objects between sites
  • Reports on Orphaned users and other audit requirements
Read full review
  • Manages multi-tenancy very well. You can setup resource pools of compute, network, and storage that are independent of each other.
  • Easy to create and manage multiple environments.
  • Has lease management technology and can easily set leases and expire them based on pre-configured time frames.
Read full review
Cons
  • Auditing -connect with MS purview
  • Better reports export for permissions matrix
  • Better user mapping (poll source and destination sites and try to auto map)
Read full review
  • Logging, there is a lot of logging but is not always clear where to look for the right logging.
  • The syncing of policy, you can't see if or what he did/didn't sync and the status of it.
  • More integrations with VMware product (click like Availability)
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
It is a powerful tool for copying files along with their associated metadata and version history. It integrates seamlessly with Microsoft 365 and supports workflow migrations. However, it may not be ideal for non-technical users. Currently, it does not support Power Platform workflow migrations and lacks a pause function—offering only start or stop options during migration.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
Overall, I am very satisfied with the ShareGate tool, which is used effectively for migration purposes, not only to migrate the contents from SharePoint to SharePoint but also to the contents from file share to SharePoint. This tool helps us review the warnings/errors from the migrations quickly and helps us identify what caused the errors. I hope the ShareGate product team will consider migration of power automated workflows using this tool in future releases.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Reliability and Availability
The tool is generally very reliable, with minimal downtime or unplanned outages. It performs consistently during migrations and administrative tasks, and users rarely encounter critical application errors.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Performance
In most cases, ShareGate performs well—pages load quickly, and reports are generated in a reasonable timeframe, even for moderately complex environments. Its interface is responsive, and it handles standard migrations and administrative tasks efficiently. However, performance can slow down during very large migrations or when processing high volumes of data, especially if the source or destination environments are heavily customized
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Haven't needed it that many times. But they respond very fast and are knowledgeable. They are easy to reach!
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
You only need some global admin consent after that you can do almost anything which is available in the app.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Sharegate is superior in most ways except teams sites migration to GCC high tenant. It’s not possible with Sharegate but abitTitan can somewhat migrate teams to GCC high tenants. I wish MS would make available the Graph for GCC so we can utilize Sharegate Team migration tools! We love the other Teams admin tools available!
Read full review
Another option was own scripting or maintaining the end users in the backend (vcenter). This costs to much time to maintain (scripting) and has a big change of a Security breach. It was not an option for us either way.
Read full review
Scalability
ShareGate scales well across departments and sites, supporting large migrations and tenant moves with strong Microsoft 365 integration. However, it lacks advanced automation, Power Platform support, and pause/resume functionality, which can limit its effectiveness in highly complex or enterprise-scale environments.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • Share gate has saved my colleagues and I hundreds of hours of migration headaches
  • Share Gates reporting tools as an administrator make my job very very simple.
  • The ROI could be measured alone in man hours saved migrating environments. That alone has probably paid for the licensing cost
Read full review
  • vCloud Director requires less IT administration. For example, there isn't a need to maintain esx host. or storage administration like creating luns.
  • A negative impact is cost. vCloud Director has a monthly cost for storage, processor core, memory, and licensing.
Read full review
ScreenShots

ShareGate Screenshots

Screenshot of the ShareGate migration tool – from migration to content management, it is used to migrate to Microsoft 365, move channels in Teams, and merge tenants.Screenshot of the Permissions Matrix Report used to validate, monitor and manage permissions for internal and external users. It is also used to audit permissions security without scripting, or update permissions in bulk.Screenshot of the built-in and custom reports that offer an overview of SharePoint and Teams inventory. They display what exists, and who created it.Screenshot of the team management interface, used to manage a SharePoint team and communication sites without PowerShell scripts. It is also used to build governance policies, and automatically spot risks, gaps and clutter.Screenshot of a display of who can do what in the SharePoint environment. From the interface, users can copy and edit permissions in bulk, control and review external sharing and guest access, or delegate control to owners to review, without leaving Teams.Screenshot of the interface where users can provision their workspaces using templates, with guardrails in place – like minimum owners, blueprint sites, naming conventions, multiple approvers, and privacy level.