Comparing Storj and Backblaze.

A comprehensive comparison of Storj distributed cloud storage versus Backblaze.

Features comparison.

This Storj and Backblaze features table compares the performance, durability, availability, scalability, ease of use, sustainability, and cost of both cloud object storage solutions. Discover what features Storj is rated higher, instances where Backblaze is rated higher, and features where both companies are on par. Overall, Storj’s distributed cloud vs. Backblaze’s central data storage puts Storj at an advantage for most use cases (see the use case comparison further down the page). Considering the best cloud storage provider for your business? Use this Storj vs. Backblaze features comparison table to make your decision.

Feature analysis summary

Overall, comparing feature sets, Backblaze and Storj have more similarities than differences. In many cases, both Backblaze and Storj have comparable features.

Performance
Upload speed	Good Potential to experience slower speed the further away from the data center origin. Source reference.	Good Consistency when accessing from different areas of the globe.
Download speed	Good Consistently good for download speed within the storage region.	Great Parallelism and low latency optimizations make downloads very fast.
Performance outside of region	Poor Potential to experience slower speed the further away from the data center origin.	Great Consistency when accessing from different areas of the globe.

Durability
Outage	Good Calculated 11 9's annual durability, but should an outage occur at their data center, customers would lose access to their data.	Great Durability is 11 9's of durability achieved through Reed-Solomon erasure codes and file repair. Because only a portion of the sharded files are needed to reconstitute and they are distributed in different locations, Storj is highly resistant to access issues.
File repair	Great Owns the data centers in a controlled environment. Cost to repair can be cheaper.	Good Automated file repair and constant performance measurement of storage nodes.
Replication	Poor Doubles the cost for each region added to store copies.	Great Multi-region/global by default and doesn’t charge for data redundancy.

Availability
Multi-region	Poor Can enable replication to other regions, but it’s pay per region/zone.	Great Can utilize its built-in global region for one low cost.
No minimum storage retention period	Great Has this feature.	Great Has this feature.
Immutability	Great Has this feature.	Great Has this feature.
Data privacy	Good When you use Backblaze, data encryption is built in. Files scheduled for backup are encrypted on your machine.	Great Easy, self-managed, end-to-end encryption built-in. Even Storj can’t read your data if they wanted to. Storj also encrypts metadata for full data privacy.

Scalability
Moving to new regions	Poor Potential to experience slower speed the further away from the data center origin. Additional cost to add regional storage.	Great No additional cost to access data in new regions as it is accessing from one global region.
Speed in moving to new regions	Poor Can enable replication to other regions, but slower process with added expense. Backblaze is also currently limited to the US and parts of Europe.	Great Data is already replicated across the globe.

Ease of use
UI/UX	Good Basic UI/UX.	Great Intuitive UI/UX that features standard developer tools including CLI, S3-compatible gateway, and Golang developer library with supported bindings.
S3 compatibility	Great Has more maturity and wider adoption.	Good Is S3 compatible and is growing traction with continuing technology investment. Source reference.
Multipart upload	Great Supports multipart upload.	Great Supports multipart upload.

Sustainability
Carbon emitted	Good Owns and operates data centers.	Great Over 70% of Storj drives are already deployed and powered. Storj has the equivalent capacity of several global data centers, without constructing a single new facility. It also enables storage providers to extend the life of existing hard drives without worrying about data loss.

Cost
Egress more than amount stored	Good $10/TB month.	Great $7/TB per month.
Egress less than amount stored	Great Offers free egress for 3x the amount of data stored.	Good Pay for all egress, but eliminates the egress from multi-region replication.
Multi-region	Good Limited to North America and Europe, but this multiplies costs to pay to replicate to others.	Great Region agnostic, data is stored on tens of thousands of storage nodes across the globe.

Where Storj scores higher.

Storj excels over Backblaze by eliminating the need for multi-region storage for accessibility or backup replication. For example, if you are using Backblaze and want your data to be fast and accessible in the United States and Europe, you have to place a copy in both regions and pay for that storage. However, Storj has the advantage of being global by default, so it doesn’t cost extra. Additionally, Backblaze only has data centers in the US and Europe, so this is not an option for customers outside those regions. Storj doesn’t have regional limitations, so this is a great option for companies scaling into new markets or regions.

Customers who benefit the most from using Storj.

Customers who need to manage lots of servers and customers who need to pull a large amount of data quickly will benefit with Storj’s distributed network. Customers who, in times of outages and disasters, need to have their data backups safe and readily available will benefit more by using Storj. Customers who need access to their data outside of the US and Europe, as well as those with more than 3x egress will need Storj globally distributed cloud storage. Additionally, customers who are working to reduce carbon emissions from cloud storage will want to select Storj.

Where Backblaze scores higher.

Backblaze excels at having a predictable cost model. It doesn’t matter what the size of the file is with Backblaze because it costs the same. Backblaze also scores higher on egress features because of their 3x free egress per month. However, if your use case requires significant egress, Backblaze won’t be a fit.

Customers who benefit the most from using Backblaze.

Customers with basic backup and recovery needs who only need one region of storage will find Backblaze cost effective.

Compare Storj to Backblaze by use case.

Let’s see how Storj and Backblaze features compare in common use cases. In terms of “Backup and Recovery” and “Video Surveillance” use cases, Backblaze is at a slight advantage. Use case categories such as “Video Streaming” place both solutions on equal rating. However, in terms of “Active Archive”, “File Transfer” and “Media Workflow” use cases, Storj receives a higher rating versus Backblaze.

Analysis summary

Overall, if you’re looking for an alternative to Amazon S3 to cut down on some costs, Backblaze and Storj are both S3 compatible and solid choices. Neither have a minimum storage retention period, and their S3 compatibility can be a drop in replacement.

Use case
Active archive	Good Good for accessing files from one region at a low price without sacrificing accessibility.	Great Has one of the lowest cost prices for data at rest and enables archived data to be used for machine learning and artificial intelligence modeling. Storj is also extremely secure and durable making it a great alternative to on-premise storage.
Backup and recovery	Great Has a few products that support their backup use case as well as verified backup and recovery providers.	Good Has verified backup providers that work well with Storj, like Veeam Ready certification, but doesn’t offer its own product.
File transfer	Good Limited to the network bandwidth of their data center.	Great Can utilize parallelism with its tens of thousands of storage nodes and has removed long-tail latency to achieve fast transfer speeds for large files.
Generative AI	Good Can scale to handle large workloads.	Great Can scale to handle large data workloads.
Media workflows	Good A good choice for production companies that only shoot and have editing resources in the US and Europe.	Great Has worked with many media companies as the industry moves to be more global and remote. Storj is the only provider that can enable global workflows in production and post-production from one global region of storage.
Scientific research	Good Can scale to handle large workloads.	Great Can scale to handle large data workloads.
Video streaming	Good Have CDN alliances that have free transfer between them and the CDNs.	Good Likely will want an additional service to resize videos or use a CDN, but for some use cases is great. Storj excels at being a CDN origin for VoD.
Video surveillance	Great Great for active archive of video surveillance where egress is 3x or less the amount stored.	Good Great for backup of video surveillance files, especially those that need to be accessible across multiple regions.

Where Storj stands out.

Storj excels over Backblaze by having multi-region replication and accessibility included by default. If you’re looking for something that is not dependent on a single physical location, Storj will provide that for a lesser price than Backblaze. Storj has the advantage for multi-region use cases because it segments and distributes data globally. In the case of an outage or natural disaster, Storj can still pull your data because the pieces are spread across the globe, not just in a single data center.

Use cases that benefit the most from using Storj.

If you needed access to your data in multiple locations across the globe, Storj would be the better choice in terms of distributed storage architecture, performance, security, and cost. Storj stands out for supporting intense use cases like global media workflows, high performance computing, and generative AI.

Where Backblaze stands out.

Backblaze excels at having a predictable cost for any use case. They have 3x free egress which will work well for backups. Partnerships with CDNs work well for multimedia use cases. Backblaze doesn’t have hidden costs, no minimum file sizes, and no minimum storage fees. Backblaze regularly publishes the lifetime and cost per hard drive on their site.

Use cases that benefit the most from using Backblaze.

Backblaze has a staple offering for backup and recovery and is cost effective at storing high volumes of small files within the US and Europe.

Put Storj to the test.

Chat with our team to get your questions answered and unlock your free trial.

Get started

An overview of Storj's distributed cloud storage interface and download bucket and geographic distribution settings