Peer-reviewed study of 443,000 Backblaze hard drives ranks HGST most reliable and Toshiba the least — Analysis of 1.66 million drive-years finds Seagate and Toshiba HDDs fail at roughly twice the rate of WD and HGST

Hard Drive
(Image credit: Getty Images)

Economists Christoph Siemroth of the University of Essex and Yeomyung Park of Sungkyunkwan University have published a peer-reviewed IEEE study that re-crunches 12 years of Backblaze's public drive data, covering 443,156 hard drives and more than 1.66 million drive-years from 2013 through Q2 2025, and finds that HGST drives fail at roughly 41% of Seagate's rate when drives of matched age, capacity, form factor, and operating temperature are compared. WD comes in at about 52% of Seagate's failure rate, while Toshiba sits in last at 107%. As for the most reliable brand in the ranking? HGST, one you can't buy new after WD acquired it in 2012 and wound it down.

Backblaze's quarterly reports compare whichever drives are available at the time, and the authors argue that approach stacks old drives against young ones because each manufacturer's fleet skews to a different era. HGST led new installations in 2014, Seagate dominated from 2015 to 2020, Toshiba topped 2023, and WD topped 2024, so raw annualized figures pit aging Seagate and HGST stock against much fresher Toshiba and WD units. A further 146,943 drives, about 31% of the sample, exited the dataset without ever failing, mostly pulled during capacity upgrades.

Toshiba's monthly failure rate more than quadruples once its drives pass 60 months in service, a monolithic jump that no other manufacturer in the dataset shows at any age. Between 50 and 100 months, Toshiba units failed at five to six per 1,000 drives per month, while the other three brands generally stayed at or below 2.5. Seagate's failure rate started highest among young drives but held steady with age. Backblaze's own analysis of its dead drives previously found most failures happened before three years of service.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware

Each additional one-degree Celsius of average drive temperature raised failure rates by 2.1% in the models, compounding to roughly 23% across a 10 degrees Celsius increase. Each extra terabyte of capacity cut failure rates by about 3.4%, which the authors attribute partly to helium-filled enclosures and newer head-fabrication processes in higher-capacity designs.

The dataset consists of enterprise drives run in Backblaze's data centers, so the ranking may not carry over to consumer models. Backblaze doesn't record comparable workload data across manufacturers, and only 0.52% of sampled drives ran longer than a decade, so the estimates reflect short- to medium-term reliability.

The authors also suggest WD's ownership of HGST plausibly explains why the two brands sit closest together, given the potential for shared technology. Backblaze's most recent annual report, published in February, put its fleet-wide annualized failure rate for 2025 at 1.36%.

Google Preferred Source

Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

TOPICS
Luke James
Contributor

Luke James is a freelance writer and journalist.  Although his background is in legal, he has a personal interest in all things tech, especially hardware and microelectronics, and anything regulatory. 

  • SomeoneElse23
    THIS!!

    This is why I always speak up when TH advertises a "deal" on a Seagate drive with a 1 or 2 year warranty.

    The warranty period almost always is what the manufacturer expects the drive to last!
    Reply
  • USAFRet
    SomeoneElse23 said:
    THIS!!

    This is why I always speak up when TH advertises a "deal" on a Seagate drive with a 1 or 2 year warranty.

    The warranty period almost always is what the manufacturer expects the drive to last!
    And a close inspection of the fail rates show not a whole lot of difference between the major brands.
    With low fail rates, a couple more or less can show "OMG, That manufacturer is worse!"

    Meanwhile....Some Seagate models showed zero fails. None, zip, nada.

    https://www.backblaze.com/blog/backblaze-drive-stats-for-2025/
    You can't generalize across a whole brand.
    Reply
  • SomeoneElse23
    To be clear, I'm saying Seagate's with 1 or 2 year warranty are garbage.

    I'm not saying all Seagate drives are garbage.

    I have a few in my systems... with 5 year warranties.
    Reply
  • USAFRet
    SomeoneElse23 said:
    To be clear, I'm saying Seagate's with 1 or 2 year warranty are garbage.

    I'm not saying all Seagate drives are garbage.

    I have a few in my systems... with 5 year warranties.
    Any drive with a 1 or 2 year warranty is suspect. No matter what manufacturer.

    But we see here, far too often, "Seagate SUX!!!"
    Reply
  • calbha
    In other news I just replaced a 2tb 12 year old toshiba so I'm unmoved on this. Guess what I replaced it with. A seagate. The dives are written too maybe 4 or 5 times in their life and then read from the rest of the time. Also just had 2 5tb western digital external gaming drives cook the platters wrapped in about a year.
    Reply
  • MosephV
    More evidence to why disk cooling is important. I know many users here are aware, but there are many people that completely ignore it. Even some case designs place HDDs in places where they can struggle to get air flow.

    If you use them, and you value your data, keep them cool (or at least not hot). It doesn't take much thankfully
    Reply
  • z84976
    calbha said:
    In other news I just replaced a 2tb 12 year old toshiba so I'm unmoved on this. Guess what I replaced it with. A seagate. The dives are written too maybe 4 or 5 times in their life and then read from the rest of the time. Also just had 2 5tb western digital external gaming drives cook the platters wrapped in about a year.
    I replaced every 3.5" (and a couple of 5.25" full height) seagate I've ever owned before 1 year, going back 35 years. I have a lot of Toshibas, never had one quit yet. WD has been good too.
    Reply
  • USAFRet
    z84976 said:
    I replaced every 3.5" (and a couple of 5.25" full height) seagate I've ever owned before 1 year, going back 35 years. I have a lot of Toshibas, never had one quit yet. WD has been good too.
    Of my last 2 dead 3.5" HDDs...
    1x Toshiba Enterprise, at 7 months old.
    1x WD, at 5 weeks old.
    Reply
  • bytedmecharlie
    Western Digital stopped using HGST on their drives in 2018. How old is this article?
    However, I remember WD making some stinker HDDs themselves. I had an 8.4GB drive replaced like SEVEN times before they gave up and mailed me four 5GB drives, back about thirty years ago. I used to regularly get rid of WD clickers clunkers and actually all HDDs. I had a Quantum Bigfoot that actually survived smoke and water damage from a building fire.
    It worked for eight more years, then I turned it into a speaker!
    Reply
  • USAFRet
    bytedmecharlie said:
    Western Digital stopped using HGST on their drives in 2018. How old is this article?
    However, I remember WD making some stinker HDDs themselves. I had an 8.4GB drive replaced like SEVEN times before they gave up and mailed me four 5GB drives, back about thirty years ago. I used to regularly get rid of WD clickers clunkers and actually all HDDs. I had a Quantum Bigfoot that actually survived smoke and water damage from a building fire.
    It worked for eight more years, then I turned it into a speaker!
    It is referring to an IEEE article from April-June 2026

    https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/11458693
    Reply