Azure Storage VS iSCSI
As of 30 October 2026, iSCSI is named by 188 companies and Azure Storage by 422; Azure Storage skews to companies under 200 people (33% vs 39%), iSCSI to companies over 1,000 (36% vs 44%).
As of 30 October 2026 · refreshed daily · counts move as websites, DNS and career sites are re-read.
The website-and-DNS footprint is not comparable between a marketing suite and a CRM: Azure Storage's script and mail records show on hundreds of thousands of small sites, iSCSI rarely leaves a trace outside its own apps. Compare on the job-posting numbers; use the footprint for reach.
- Azure Storage: 2–200 employees
- 33%
- iSCSI: 2–200 employees
- 39%
- Azure Storage: 1,000+ employees
- 44%
- iSCSI: 1,000+ employees
- 36%
- Postings per company, 90 days
- 2.6 · 2.6
- Website or DNS footprint
- 0 · 0
Who chooses which
Share of each tool's companies in every segment. "Leans" marks a gap of more than two points.
| Segment | Azure Storage | share | iSCSI | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-employed | 6 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| 2-10 employees | 21 | 5% | 7 | 4% | even |
| 11-50 employees | 39 | 9% | 27 | 14% | iSCSI |
| 51-200 employees | 79 | 19% | 39 | 21% | iSCSI |
| 201-500 employees | 58 | 14% | 33 | 18% | iSCSI |
| 501-1000 employees | 34 | 8% | 15 | 8% | even |
| 1001-5000 employees | 77 | 18% | 40 | 21% | iSCSI |
| 5001-10000 employees | 29 | 7% | 6 | 3% | Azure Storage |
| 10,001+ employees | 79 | 19% | 21 | 11% | Azure Storage |
| Segment | Azure Storage | share | iSCSI | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technology & software | 206 | 49% | 103 | 55% | iSCSI |
| Business & finance services | 97 | 23% | 24 | 13% | Azure Storage |
| Manufacturing & industry | 27 | 6% | 29 | 15% | iSCSI |
| Commerce & trade | 14 | 3% | 6 | 3% | even |
| Consumer services & leisure | 14 | 3% | 2 | 1% | Azure Storage |
| Utilities & infrastructure | 14 | 3% | 5 | 3% | even |
| Health care | 11 | 3% | 5 | 3% | even |
| Public, community & associations | 9 | 2% | 6 | 3% | even |
| Media & content | 8 | 2% | 3 | 2% | even |
| Transport, logistics & rental | 6 | 1% | 1 | 1% | even |
| Automotive | 5 | 1% | 2 | 1% | even |
| Property & construction | 5 | 1% | 2 | 1% | even |
| Segment | Azure Storage | share | iSCSI | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 247 | 59% | 124 | 66% | iSCSI |
| United Kingdom | 34 | 8% | 6 | 3% | Azure Storage |
| India | 22 | 5% | 5 | 3% | Azure Storage |
| Germany | 20 | 5% | 10 | 5% | even |
| Canada | 17 | 4% | 6 | 3% | even |
| Australia | 11 | 3% | 2 | 1% | even |
| France | 8 | 2% | 2 | 1% | even |
| Sweden | 7 | 2% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Poland | 6 | 1% | 4 | 2% | even |
| Switzerland | 5 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Netherlands | 4 | 1% | 2 | 1% | even |
| Portugal | 4 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Italy | – | – | 5 | 3% | outside top 12 |
| Brazil | – | – | 3 | 2% | outside top 12 |
| Belgium | – | – | 2 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | Azure Storage | share | iSCSI | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Software engineering | 563 | 41% | 106 | 15% | Azure Storage |
| Data & AI | 338 | 25% | 3 | 0% | Azure Storage |
| IT operations & business systems | 283 | 21% | 345 | 50% | iSCSI |
| Product, program & project management | 9 | 1% | 8 | 1% | even |
| Sales | 7 | 1% | 45 | 7% | iSCSI |
| Construction and civil | 6 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Quality, safety & environment | 6 | 0% | 6 | 1% | even |
| Engineering (non-software) | 5 | 0% | 33 | 5% | iSCSI |
| Customer service & success | 4 | 0% | 13 | 2% | even |
| Education & training | 3 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Administration & office | 2 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Arts media and entertainment | 2 | 0% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Logistics warehouse and transport | – | – | 1 | 0% | outside top 12 |
| Skilled trades and field service | – | – | 1 | 0% | outside top 12 |
The companies behind each column
Companies using Azure Storage →
Companies using iSCSI →
storage systems ranked →
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
iSCSI is named by 188 companies in job postings and Azure Storage by 422; 0 name both. (Breaknorm, 30 October 2026, https://breaknorm.co/compare/azure-storage-vs-iscsi)
Read from the source, not self-reported
Every number on this page can be traced to a page we crawled or a posting we read. Full methodology →
- Job postingsRead hourly from career sites. A tool counts when the employer's own text names it as the team's system; both tools can count for one company.
- Website and DNSScripts and embeds on the company's pages, plus SPF, DKIM, MX and CNAME records of its domain that point at the vendor.
- SegmentsCountry, size and industry from the company profile built from its website.
- Not a reviewNo ratings, prices or feature claims. For those, read the vendors.
Azure Storage vs iSCSI: questions
Which is more used, Azure Storage or iSCSI?
By companies naming it in their own job postings, Azure Storage (422) over iSCSI (188). By website-and-DNS footprint, iSCSI (0 vs 0), because its scripts and mail records sit on many small company sites.
Who chooses Azure Storage?
33% of Azure Storage companies have 2 to 200 employees, against 39% for iSCSI. 44% of Azure Storage companies have over 1,000 employees, against 36% for iSCSI.
Do companies run both?
0 companies name both in their postings, usually Azure Storage in marketing and iSCSI in sales, or during a migration.
Where do these numbers come from?
From the employer's own text in job postings read hourly from career sites, and from scripts found on company websites in our crawl. No vendor data, no surveys.
Get either list your way
The same data as a search, over MCP and the API, as bulk files, or pushed to you as it changes.
Every company on either tool,
with the person who owns it
Filter on Azure Storage or iSCSI. Start free, no card.