Given the peeks that amazon has provided into the scale of S3, I don't know if you CAN 'back it up'.
Allegedly, compliance mode is unalterable by any account period, I guess the equivalent of the immutable attribute without an overriding account. I'm not immediately familiar with any literature on attacks on this feature, but I've also not searched hard; however, I know from my clients that it's an accepted form of WORM, and that cloud storages like S3 are considered in the same vein as tape when immutability is in play.
I suppose it will be a case in the future that proves the efficacy of AWS/Azure/s3 providers, but for now, a lot of regulatory policies for 3-2-1 allow for such storage to fulfill the "2" part of the 3-2-1 rule.
A slightly larger company also used tapes, and stored them at an undisclosed (to me) offsite location.
A much larger company kept it all in datacenters, but the "offline" backups were disconnected from the WAN when they weren't actively being used.
Depending on how much data you're backing up, sneakernet works.
When I was still in the office, my company had me rotate a set of backup hard drives between the office lockup and a strongbox in my house. The notion was that it was unlikely that both the office building and my house 12 miles away would both burn down at the same time.
Of course, now I'm working from home, so all of the eggs are in one basket again.
1) That nobody in our company actually knew where they were physically stored (insider risk?), but
2) That we had assurance that the physical storage was far enough away that a physical disaster in our area wouldn't also touch where the offline storage was located.
There's a concomitant jump in RTO if that's what you do this, but hopefully that's well understood among the stakeholders.
The drives are encrypted (Truecrypt) since they will be outside my physical control. The ones at the office I am prepared to abandon should I get fired/laid-off.