Blog/·updated ·12 min read

SharePoint archiving software compared: an honest guide to the tools on the market

When your SharePoint tenant fills up, every vendor has a pitch — and every pitch conveniently leaves out the part where their approach costs you something. This is a comparison of the SharePoint archiving software on the market in 2026: the five broad approaches, the specific tools competing for the category (Archive360, Preservica, ShareArchiver, Squirrel, ShArc, AvePoint Opus and, yes, ArchiveBridge), what to actually score them on, and a worked cost example. We’ll name where each competitor genuinely wins.

One warning before the list. Search for SharePoint archiving tools and a good half of what comes back isn’t archiving software at all — it’s governance platforms, migration tools, and forum threads. That’s covered further down, because knowing which category a product is in saves more time than any feature comparison.

The five approaches to archiving SharePoint

Before you compare products, understand that they cluster into five fundamentally different strategies. Most “which tool is best” arguments are really arguments about which of these you should be doing at all.

  • Buy more storage. The Office 365 Extra File Storage add-on, or the newer pay-as-you-go metering. Zero migration risk, zero learning curve — and the most expensive per-gigabyte answer there is, at roughly US$0.20/GB/month for hot storage you’re using to hold cold files. It solves the banner, not the bill.
  • Clean up. Trim version history, empty the two-stage recycle bin, delete duplicates and orphaned sites. Genuinely worth doing, genuinely free — and genuinely temporary, because the pool refills as soon as normal work resumes.
  • Microsoft 365 Archive. Microsoft’s own cold tier, which moves inactive content to colder storage inside your tenant so it stops counting against the active quota. Native, compliant, and cheaper than the add-on — but still Microsoft-priced and still locked in your tenant.
  • Stub-based third-party archiving. A tool moves cold files to cheaper object or blob storage and leaves a lightweight “stub” behind so links keep working. This is where ShareArchiver, Squirrel, ShArc and ArchiveBridge all live — they differ mostly in where the data goes and how carefully the move is verified.
  • Governance and lifecycle suites. Enterprise platforms like AvePoint Opus that treat archiving as one feature inside records management, classification, and defensible disposal. More capability, more cost, more to run.

For a deeper look at how the native tier stacks up against the third-party approach specifically, we wrote a dedicated Microsoft 365 Archive vs third-party archiving comparison. This piece is the wider field.

Where each vendor genuinely wins

Here is where each of the main SharePoint archiving solutions genuinely earns its place — and where the fine print lives.

Microsoft 365 Archive is the safe default and, for many tenants, the right one. It bills archived data at US$0.05/GB/month — a quarter of the standard US$0.20/GB rate — and, as of 2026, supports both site-level and file-level archiving at the same rate. Its real strengths are that data never leaves the Microsoft compliance boundary and there’s no new vendor to onboard. The gotchas: reactivating archived content is now free, but re-archiving anything you reactivate is restricted for a set lockout period, the cold data still lives on Microsoft-priced storage, and you’re billed only for what exceeds your quota — so its savings depend entirely on how far over the line you are.

Archive360 is the most visible name in this category and pitches squarely at regulatory risk rather than storage cost. Its material leads on knowing what SharePoint content you actually hold, keeping it defensible, finding it again quickly under legal pressure, and — the part that tends to matter most in practice — migration connectors that pull content out of legacy archives you’re trying to retire. If your driver is an auditor, a regulator, or a legacy journaling archive nobody wants to touch, that is a genuinely different and harder problem than moving cold files somewhere cheaper, and it’s the one Archive360 is built around. The trade-off is the shape of the purchase: it’s an enterprise platform sold through a conversation, with no published pricing, so evaluation starts with a demo rather than a number.

Preservica (Preserve365) is in this category by search result rather than by discipline, and its own material draws the distinction explicitly: archiving versus preservation. Preservation means keeping a record readable and demonstrably authentic for decades, which involves migrating file formats forward as they age out — a different obligation from parking bytes on cheaper disks. For a government archive, a university, or anyone whose retention schedule is measured in decades rather than years, that distinction is the whole requirement, and a storage-tier move genuinely does not meet it. For everyone else it is considerably more machinery than a high storage bill calls for.

ShareArchiver ranks at the top of this category for a reason: it’s a mature, stub-based archiver with a strong story around fast retrieval. Its own material claims a stub click restores a file instantly, versus a wait it attributes to Microsoft’s native archiving. It also spans file servers, not just SharePoint — useful if you have hybrid on-prem data. Its limitation is that it’s a broad, feature-heavy enterprise product; if all you need is to move cold SharePoint files to a cheap bucket, there’s a lot of platform to buy and run.

Squirrel (by SmiKar) does one thing cleanly: it moves inactive SharePoint Online documents into cheaper Azure Blob tiers on lifecycle policies you set, and it advertises savings of 60–85%. For a Microsoft-and-Azure shop that wants its archive to stay inside Azure, that tight focus is a genuine strength. The trade-off is right there in the design: the destination is Azure Blob, full stop — if you’d rather use Wasabi or Backblaze B2 at a lower flat rate, that isn’t the model. Pricing is an annual platform fee plus a per-TB-archived charge.

ShArc(by Layer2) is the “work in SharePoint, store in Azure” option — it archives inactive files to Azure Blob Storage in the background and advertises around 61% lower costs. Like Squirrel, its strength is a low-friction, set-and-forget experience for Azure-committed organisations, and its constraint is the same: Azure is the destination by design, so the storage price floor is Azure’s, not the cheapest S3-compatible provider’s.

AvePoint Opus plays a different game entirely. It’s an advanced information lifecycle management platform — archiving sits alongside classification with Purview sensitivity labels, records management, and defensible disposal, all from a central console spanning SharePoint, Exchange, and beyond. If your driver is compliance and governance across the whole estate, Opus is genuinely more capable than any single-purpose archiver here. If your driver is simply a storage bill that’s too high, it’s more platform — and more cost — than the problem needs.

ArchiveBridge — ours — is deliberately narrow: back up OneDrive and move cold SharePoint files to your own S3-compatible bucket(Wasabi, Backblaze B2, or hosted). OneDrive originals stay put. A cold SharePoint original is removed and replaced with a one-click restore stub only after the stored copy passes SHA-256 verification. We don’t do records management or physical-records governance, and the data does leave SharePoint’s native boundary (a well-built tool stays Purview- and legal-hold-aware to compensate). What we optimise for is the lowest defensible cost per terabyte and an exit path that isn’t locked to one cloud.

Half the “archiving tools” in your search results aren’t archivers

Search for SharePoint archiving tools and the results are a mix of four different things, only one of which will reduce your storage bill. Telling them apart first saves weeks.

  • Actual archivers move cold files to cheaper storage and leave something behind so links keep working. Everything in the section above.
  • Governance and workspace-lifecycle platforms— Orchestry is the one you’ll see most, and it frames the choice as archiving versus offloading. These find the abandoned Teams and SharePoint workspaces nobody has opened in two years and help you retire them. That’s a real problem, and if yours is sprawl rather than volume it may be the right one to solve first. But retiring empty workspaces doesn’t move a terabyte of cold files off premium storage.
  • Migration and management tools — ShareGate is the recurring name. Excellent at moving content between tenants and reporting on what you have; not designed to sit there permanently tiering cold data to a cheap bucket.
  • Forum threads and vendor Q&A. A surprising share of the first page is Reddit and Microsoft’s own community answers. Worth reading for candour — admins there are blunt about pricing in a way vendor pages never are — but they’re opinions, and often about a version of the product that has since changed.

The practical filter: ask a vendor what physically happens to a 40 MB file that hasn’t been opened since 2021. If the answer involves that file being copied somewhere cheaper and something being left in its place, you’re talking to an archiver. If it involves reports, labels, policies, or a workspace being retired, you’re talking to something else — possibly something you need, but not something that will change the invoice.

How to score SharePoint archiving tools

Feature lists are noise. Four questions separate the SharePoint archiving software that will still look like a good decision in three years from the products that won’t:

  • Does it verify before it deletes? Archiving is a move, and a move is only safe if the copy is confirmed intact before the original is removed. Ask specifically whether the tool hashes both sides (e.g. SHA-256) and what the audit record looks like. “Trust us” isn’t an answer — see our note on verify-before-delete and the audit trail.
  • Can you bring your own storage? Azure-only tools inherit Azure’s price floor. Tools that write to any S3-compatible bucket let you shop the cheapest durable provider — often a large gap at scale.
  • What’s the exit path? If you stop paying, what happens to your archived files and their stubs? A clean answer (your bucket, your data, documented restore) beats a proprietary vault you can’t leave.
  • Per-seat or per-terabyte? Cold data scales with terabytes, not headcount. Per-seat pricing quietly punishes small teams with big archives; per-TB pricing tracks the actual cost driver.

A cost comparison worked example

Take a mid-size tenant sitting 5 TB over quota in cold, rarely-touched files. Here’s roughly what each approach does to the annual bill for that same 5 TB (figures are indicative — confirm current rates and your own numbers before deciding):

  • Buy more storage: ~US$0.20/GB/month × 5,120 GB ≈ US$12,000+/year, forever, and rising as the data grows.
  • Microsoft 365 Archive: ~US$0.05/GB/month ≈ ~US$3,000/year — a real cut, with the data still inside Microsoft.
  • Stub-based to object storage (ArchiveBridge with your own bucket): A$29/TB/month management plus your provider’s own storage rate, with the files still searchable and one click from restore.

“Buy more” and “archive to a cheap bucket” are priced very differently on the same bytes. Put your tenant’s actual numbers through the SharePoint storage cost calculator rather than trusting any of these round figures.

Which SharePoint archiving solution fits which org

There isn’t one winner. The right fit depends on the situation:

  • Small overage, compliance-first, no appetite for a new vendor: Microsoft 365 Archive. Native, simple, and the savings are enough when the overage is modest.
  • Regulatory risk, eDiscovery, or a legacy archive to retire: Archive360. The migration connectors alone can justify it if you’re decommissioning an old journaling archive.
  • Statutory retention measured in decades: Preservica. If you have to produce a readable, authentic record in twenty-five years, that’s preservation, and a cheaper storage tier doesn’t satisfy it.
  • Enterprise governance and records management across the whole estate: AvePoint Opus. You’re buying lifecycle control, not just a cheaper gigabyte — though if the storage bill is the actual driver, it’s worth reading where a narrower tool costs less before committing to a platform.
  • Azure-committed, want a clean set-and-forget archiver: Squirrel or ShArc. Both do the core job well if Azure Blob is where you want the data to land.
  • Hybrid file-server + SharePoint, want a mature feature-rich platform: ShareArchiver.
  • Large or growing cold-data bill, want the lowest cost and no cloud lock-in: ArchiveBridge — bring your own bucket, verify-before-delete, per-TB pricing, and an exit path that’s just your own storage. See exactly how the archive-and-stub pipeline works.

Whichever way you lean, the decision runs on your numbers, not a vendor’s headline percentage. The fastest way to get them is a free, read-only tenant scan: it reports how many gigabytes of aged files you’re paying the premium rate to keep, and what moving them would save — before a single file moves, and with no commitment to us or anyone else.

Frequently asked questions

What is the best SharePoint archiving software?

There isn't a single best one, because the products solve different problems. If the driver is regulatory risk, Archive360 is built around compliance and legal defensibility. If it's a statutory obligation to keep records readable for decades, that's digital preservation and Preservica's territory. If it's governance across the whole Microsoft estate, AvePoint Opus. If it's simply a storage bill that's too high, a stub-based archiver that writes to cheap object storage — ShareArchiver, Squirrel, ShArc or ArchiveBridge — will cost least. Score them on whether they verify before deleting, whether you can bring your own storage, what the exit path looks like, and whether pricing is per terabyte or per seat.

Does Microsoft have built-in SharePoint archiving software?

Yes. Microsoft 365 Archive moves inactive content to a colder tier inside your own tenant, billed at about US$0.05 per GB per month against roughly US$0.20 for standard SharePoint storage. It covers both site-level and file-level archiving. The data never leaves Microsoft's compliance boundary, which is its main advantage, but it also stays on Microsoft-priced storage — so the saving is capped by how far over your quota you are, and reactivated content is restricted from being re-archived for a lockout period.

Is there free SharePoint archiving software?

Not in any meaningful sense. Cleaning up — trimming version history, emptying the two-stage recycle bin, deleting orphaned sites — is free and worth doing, but it's housekeeping rather than archiving, and the pool refills as normal work resumes. Microsoft 365 Archive is a paid tier, and every third-party archiver charges either per terabyte or as a platform fee. Several vendors, including ArchiveBridge, will scan your tenant for free and tell you how much cold data you're paying to keep before you commit to anything.

What is the difference between SharePoint archiving and backup?

Backup makes a separate copy and changes nothing in SharePoint. It gives you a recovery source if the original is deleted, corrupted or encrypted. That is separate from the optional 1–90 day compliance retention available to paid accounts on ArchiveBridge-managed, Object-Lock-capable storage. Archiving moves the original out to cheaper storage and reclaims the space, which is what reduces the bill. They answer different questions, and most organisations want both: back up everything, then archive the cold portion as it ages. A tool that only archives leaves you without a recovery position; a tool that only backs up leaves the storage bill exactly where it was.

Is it better to buy more SharePoint storage or archive first?

Archive first, in almost every case where the data is genuinely cold. Buying more storage at roughly US$0.20 per GB per month solves the warning banner but leaves you paying premium rates to hold files nobody opens, and the bill grows as the data does. Archiving the cold portion to object storage is priced separately, at your chosen provider's own published rate per terabyte. Buying more is the right answer when the overage is small, temporary, or the data is genuinely active — at which point it isn't an archiving problem at all.

Can SharePoint archiving software move files to Wasabi or Amazon S3?

Some can, and it materially affects the price. Several archivers write only to Azure Blob Storage, which means you inherit Azure's price floor. Tools that support any S3-compatible destination let you choose a provider like Wasabi or Backblaze B2, at their own published rates, and let you keep the bucket in your own account. If long-term cost per terabyte is the reason you're archiving, where the tool is allowed to write is one of the more consequential questions to ask.

See your number before anything moves.

The scan is read-only and takes minutes. You’ll have your exact reclaimable GB — and what it saves — before deciding between Microsoft’s tier and ours.

Run a free read-only scanTalk to an engineer