Remote Support Start download

Cloud Backup Providers Compared: B2, Storj, Wasabi, AWS

BackupCloudTrueNAS
Cloud Backup Providers Compared: B2, Storj, Wasabi, AWS

The 3-2-1 backup rule is now standard: three copies, two media, one offsite. The “offsite” piece for many SMBs today lives at an S3-compatible cloud provider — because it integrates effortlessly with TrueNAS Cloud Sync, Proxmox Backup Server and Veeam. But which provider? Backblaze B2, Storj, Wasabi and AWS S3 are the four heavyweights; each has a different profile. We don’t deliver a price list — those change monthly — but an evaluation matrix with criteria to help an SMB choose in a structured way.

Why S3-compatible?

S3 isn’t only an Amazon service but the de-facto protocol for object storage. All common backup tools (Veeam, Borg, Restic, Duplicacy, TrueNAS Cloud Sync, Proxmox Backup Server 4.x+) speak S3 — which concretely means:

  • Multi-vendor strategy: B2 today, Wasabi tomorrow, your own MinIO cluster the day after — backup tooling doesn’t change
  • Object Lock: S3 Object Lock enables immutable backups (ransomware protection)
  • Replication: cross-region replication is a built-in standard
  • Versioning: S3 automatically keeps versions (when enabled)

Anyone picking a provider that only speaks a proprietary protocol (classic “online backup providers”) is effectively bound to that tool — switching later gets expensive.

The four providers at a glance

Backblaze B2

  • Model: pure cloud storage provider, one of the pioneers of cheap object storage
  • Locations: US-West, US-East, EU (Amsterdam)
  • Geo-redundancy: within a region via erasure coding across multiple data centers
  • Egress: first 3× of stored data per month free to the internet, billed beyond
  • Minimum retention: none
  • API: native B2 API plus S3-compatible layer
  • Strength: very simple pricing, one of the cheapest options on the market
  • Weakness: limited region choice, no German location

Storj

  • Model: decentralized storage network — files are split into erasure-coded fragments across hundreds of nodes
  • Locations: globally distributed, geofencing selectable (e.g., “EU only”)
  • Geo-redundancy: structurally built-in via erasure coding across multiple nodes/regions
  • Egress: flat per GB, often cheaper than classic providers
  • Minimum retention: none
  • API: native Storj API plus S3-compatible gateway (Storj S3 Gateway)
  • Strength: very high redundancy by architecture; iX-Storj is the TrueNAS-specific Storj variant with seamless TrueNAS web-UI integration
  • Weakness: conceptually unusual — anyone who wants “one data center” as a target is conceptually wrong here

Wasabi Hot Cloud Storage

  • Model: S3-compatible “hot storage” — no tier distinctions, no lifecycle management
  • Locations: US, EU (Amsterdam, Frankfurt, London, Paris, Milan), APAC
  • Geo-redundancy: per region
  • Egress: no egress charge (very unusual on the market!)
  • Minimum retention: 90-day minimum storage time — files deleted earlier are still billed for 90 days
  • API: S3-compatible
  • Strength: no egress = predictable cost, especially during frequent restores; Frankfurt location available
  • Weakness: the 90-day minimum is a show-stopper for short-lived backups (e.g., build artifacts)

AWS S3 / S3 Glacier

  • Model: hyperscaler with full AWS integration; storage classes Standard / IA / Glacier / Deep Archive
  • Locations: worldwide, eu-central-1 (Frankfurt) and eu-central-2 (Zurich) for EU workloads
  • Geo-redundancy: three AZs per region for standard storage; cross-region replication optional
  • Egress: per GB with tiered volume discounts
  • Minimum retention: none for Standard; Glacier 90 days, Deep Archive 180 days
  • API: S3 (the original)
  • Strength: full maturity, compliance certificates (BSI C5, ISO 27001, etc.), deepest AWS integration
  • Weakness: tends to have the highest list price, complex pricing with many variables

Evaluation matrix

CriterionBackblaze B2StorjWasabiAWS S3
Price (storage, ballpark)CheapVery cheapMediumHigh (Standard) to very cheap (Glacier DA)
Egress costFree up to 3×, then mediumFlat per GBNonePer GB, tiered
EU locationAmsterdamGeofencing possibleFrankfurt, more EUFrankfurt, Zurich
DACH complianceSolidVia EU geofencingSolidVery comprehensive
S3 Object LockYesYesYesYes
Minimum storage timeNoneNone90 days0 (Standard) / 90 / 180 days
Glacier-classNo, uniform classNo, uniform classNo, uniform classYes (Glacier IR / DA)
TrueNAS integrationStandardiX-Storj nativeStandardStandard
API maturityVery goodMature S3 compat since 2024Very goodReference
Multi-region within providerMediumStructuralGoodVery good

Important: concrete dollar amounts per TB-month fluctuate at all four providers. We deliberately don’t quote them here — they would be stale by publication. Instead, the price lists are linked directly:

Three typical SMB scenarios

Scenario A: daily server backups, rare restores

  • Volume: 5 TB
  • Restore frequency: 1× per quarter for testing, 1–2× per year for real
  • Retention: 90 days daily, 12 months monthly

Recommendation: Wasabi or B2. Wasabi drops egress charges — good for rare restores that tend to be large. B2 is slightly cheaper on pure storage but charges egress on restores. Both offer Frankfurt/Amsterdam in the EU.

Scenario B: Veeam M365 backup with frequent item-level restores

  • Volume: 2 TB
  • Restore frequency: multiple times per week (single mails/calendar items)
  • Retention: 7 years, tamper-resistant

Recommendation: AWS S3 with lifecycle to Glacier IR after 30 days. Hot tier for recent mail (fast item-level restores), Glacier IR for older — the tiered model plays to its strengths here. Alternative: Wasabi, if the 90-day minimum is tolerable.

Scenario C: TrueNAS replication as a second offsite rail

  • Volume: 50 TB
  • Restore frequency: rare, worst case “data center gone”
  • Retention: TrueNAS snapshot chain

Recommendation: Storj / iX-Storj. The decentralized architecture provides structural redundancy, the per-TB price is competitive, the TrueNAS integration is native. For very large data volumes a comparison with AWS S3 Glacier Deep Archive pays off — it is unbeatably cheap for rarely accessed data.

What really drives the choice

From our advisory practice:

  1. Restore frequency is the most important factor — frequent restores make egress the dominant cost line
  2. EU location is non-negotiable as soon as personal data or professional confidentiality is in play
  3. API maturity matters — we have hit edge cases on newer S3 implementations that didn’t pair ideally with classic backup tools
  4. Minimum storage time is the most frequent trap for buyers who anchor “cheap” only on the storage price
  5. Compliance certificates are formally needed by few SMBs but reassuring during audits

Configuration tips

  • Enable Object Lock — at least “Governance Mode” for 30 days as ransomware protection
  • Use lifecycle policies — automatically push old versions to cheaper tiers (especially on AWS)
  • Bucket versioning — without it, an accidental “delete backup” has catastrophic effect
  • Multi-factor delete — decisive safeguard against compromised API keys
  • Client-side encryption — even if the provider encrypts, client-side is the clean variant

DATAZONE recommendation

We usually set up cloud backup for our customers with a multi-provider strategy: a primary provider matching the workload and location, a secondary one (for critical data) at a different provider in a different region. That guards not only against hardware failures but also against vendor insolvencies or API incompatibilities after a provider update.

Related articles:

Sources

Need IT consulting?

Contact us for a no-obligation consultation on Proxmox, OPNsense, TrueNAS and more.

Get in touch