Datto Alternative: What MSPs Are Actually Switching To in 2026

Why MSPs are actually leaving Datto

Kaseya acquired Datto in June 2022. The acquisition price was $6.2 billion, funded largely by private equity. Private equity acquisitions at that scale require margin expansion. The mechanism for margin expansion in a software business is almost always the same: raise prices on the installed base.

MSPs who had 3-year contracts locked in pre-acquisition held their pricing through 2024 and into 2025. As those contracts expired, renewals came in at substantially higher numbers. Some MSPs reported rate increases of 40 percent or more. Others were migrated to Kaseya-managed infrastructure and encountered support changes that complicated workflows they had built over years.

None of this is a product failure. Datto BCDR still protects data. Datto RMM still monitors endpoints. The technology did not regress. What changed was the economic relationship between Datto and its MSP customers, and for many, the new economics no longer hold up against alternatives that have matured considerably since Datto last needed serious competition.

That context matters because it should change how you evaluate alternatives. If you are leaving because pricing changed, not because the product failed, then you need alternatives that match Datto's reliability at a better price point, not alternatives that fix a problem Datto never had. The evaluation criteria are different.

What Datto actually covers: know what you are replacing

Before evaluating any alternative, you need to be specific about which part of Datto you are replacing. Datto is not one product. It is a portfolio that touches four separate categories of MSP operations.

The reason this breakdown matters is practical: most "Datto alternative" posts treat Datto as a monolith. But a 20-person MSP leaving Datto RMM has a completely different evaluation than a 20-person MSP leaving Datto SIRIS. The alternatives overlap in some places and diverge sharply in others. Know which product you are replacing before you spend time on comparisons.

BCDR and backup alternatives

If you are replacing Datto's BCDR stack, you are making a decision that affects recovery time objectives and business continuity for every client you migrate. This is not a fast switch. Plan for a 90 to 180 day migration window if you have more than 15 clients on Datto appliances.

Acronis Cyber Protect: The most direct Datto SIRIS alternative from a capability standpoint. Acronis combines backup, DR, anti-malware, and endpoint protection in a single agent. The platform is available as cloud-to-cloud, agent-to-cloud, or with Acronis hardware appliances. Pricing is more flexible than Datto's appliance model. The integration layer is deep: Acronis has native connectors to ConnectWise Manage, Autotask, and most major RMM platforms. The weakness is complexity. Acronis packs a lot into the platform and the configuration surface is large.

Axcient x360Recover: Purpose-built for MSPs and probably the closest operational match to the Datto SIRIS experience. Axcient offers both appliance and cloud-only options, bootable backups, and an MSP-centric management console. Many MSPs who leave Datto end up here specifically because the operational workflow is familiar. Axcient also offers a direct Datto migration program, which reduces friction on the switch.

Veeam: The dominant choice for MSPs with virtualized environments. If your clients are running VMware or Hyper-V, Veeam's backup efficiency and granular recovery options are hard to match. Veeam is less suited to physical-first environments. The Veeam Data Platform also has a Veeam Backup for Microsoft 365 module that can replace Datto SaaS Protection. If your stack is already VMware-heavy, Veeam consolidates well.

NAKIVO: The value-tier option. NAKIVO offers strong virtual machine backup and replication at a price point that undercuts both Datto and Veeam. The management interface is clean and the performance benchmarks are competitive. NAKIVO fits MSPs that want to reduce backup costs without sacrificing reliability, particularly for SMB clients who do not require instant virtualization or advanced DR orchestration.

Tool	Best for	Pricing model	Key strength
Acronis Cyber Protect	MSPs wanting backup + security in one agent	Per workload, cloud or appliance	Broad coverage, deep PSA/RMM integration
Axcient x360Recover	MSPs migrating directly from Datto SIRIS	Per device, appliance or cloud	Familiar workflow, migration support
Veeam	MSPs with VMware/Hyper-V heavy client base	Per socket/workload, tiered	VM backup efficiency, M365 coverage
NAKIVO	MSPs prioritizing cost reduction	Per VM or socket	Competitive pricing, clean interface

RMM alternatives

Datto RMM alternatives have more competitive options than the BCDR side does. The RMM market saw significant investment and product development between 2020 and 2025, which means you are not settling when you switch. Several alternatives are stronger products for specific use cases.

NinjaRMM (NinjaOne): The most common destination for MSPs leaving Datto RMM. NinjaRMM has consistently led satisfaction surveys in the MSP channel for the past three years. The interface is cleaner than Datto RMM, the scripting engine is capable, patch management is reliable, and pricing is competitive. If you are evaluating a Datto RMM alternative without a specific constraint driving you elsewhere, NinjaRMM is the right starting point. The platform also integrates with ConnectWise Manage, Autotask, and Halo, and has a native RMM-to-PSA ticketing workflow that most teams find easier to configure than Datto's equivalent.

N-able RMM: The option for MSPs that need depth over simplicity. N-able has been in the MSP RMM market longer than most competitors and the feature surface is enormous. If your team has complex automation requirements, granular patch management policies, or multi-site clients with unusual configurations, N-able's depth becomes an advantage. The tradeoff is that N-able requires more onboarding time and the interface is not as immediately intuitive as NinjaRMM. It rewards investment. MSPs that have a dedicated technical operations person get more out of it than smaller teams where everyone is doing multiple jobs.

Syncro: The choice for smaller MSPs that want RMM and PSA in a single platform without managing two separate systems. Syncro bundles ticketing, billing, and endpoint management into a unified interface at a per-technician price point. If you are a 2 to 8 person MSP running Datto RMM alongside a PSA you barely use, Syncro often simplifies the stack meaningfully. The limitation is ceiling: as you grow past 200 to 300 endpoints per technician, Syncro's performance in large environments becomes a consideration.

Atera: The choice for MSPs that want unlimited endpoints without per-device pricing. Atera charges per technician, not per endpoint, which changes the unit economics significantly for MSPs with high endpoint density per client. If you have clients running large networks, the per-technician model can produce substantially lower per-endpoint costs than Datto RMM's device-based pricing. Atera has also added AI-assisted scripting and ticket triage features that reduce technician time on routine tasks.

Tool	Best for	Pricing model	Key strength
NinjaRMM	Most MSPs switching from Datto RMM	Per device	Clean interface, PSA integration, satisfaction scores
N-able RMM	MSPs with complex automation and patching requirements	Per device, tiered	Deep feature set, long MSP channel history
Syncro	Small MSPs wanting RMM + PSA in one platform	Per technician	Unified stack, simplified operations
Atera	MSPs with high endpoint density per technician	Per technician, unlimited endpoints	Predictable cost, AI-assisted workflows

The evaluation mistake most MSPs make

Most MSPs approaching this decision treat it as a pure tool comparison. Features, pricing, integrations, migration complexity. Those factors matter. But there is a second-order consideration that almost every comparison post ignores, and it is the one that determines whether the switch actually improves your business.

Your clients do not care which RMM you run. They do not care whether it is Datto RMM or NinjaRMM or N-able. What they care about is whether they can see, every month, that their systems are being protected. That their endpoints are monitored. That their patches are applied. That their backups completed. They care about evidence, not infrastructure.

The problem is structural: every RMM and backup tool generates the data that would serve as that evidence. Backup job completion rates, patch compliance percentages, alert counts, endpoints online. All of it is in the tool. None of it reaches clients automatically. Getting that data from your RMM into a client-facing report requires a human being to extract it, format it, brand it, and send it. Every month. For every client.

MSPs switching from Datto to NinjaRMM often replicate this problem exactly. The new tool works better. The reporting process is unchanged. Clients still do not receive consistent monthly reports because the tool switch did not address the reporting gap. The only thing that changed is the name on the RMM dashboard your clients never see.

The reporting gap that follows you to every new tool

Consider what a complete monthly MSP report actually requires:

• Backup jobs completed, with success and failure counts
• Endpoints monitored and online status
• Patches applied and patches outstanding
• Tickets opened and resolved, with average response and resolution times
• Alerts generated and actioned
• Security events flagged and resolved

That data lives in at least two systems: your RMM for the endpoint and backup side, your PSA for the ticketing and response side. Combining it into a single branded document, formatted for a non-technical reader, on a fixed schedule for every client in your roster, is not a trivial task. For a 20-client MSP, a properly done monthly reporting process runs 2 to 4 hours per report, or 40 to 80 hours per month. That number does not change when you switch from Datto to NinjaRMM. The labor lives in the reporting process, not the tool.

The MSPs who handle this well have either built dedicated reporting workflows with a person who owns the process, or they have moved to a done-for-you model where the reports are produced and delivered without their team's time. The MSPs who handle it poorly send inconsistent or nonexistent reports and wonder why clients do not perceive the value of the contract they are paying for.

Switching your RMM or backup tool is a meaningful operational decision. But if you switch without solving the reporting problem, you will spend three to six months on migration, stabilize on the new platform, and find yourself in exactly the same position with client reporting that you were in before. The tool improved. The client relationship did not.

Frequently asked questions