No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS WAF vs Microsoft Azure Application Gateway comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
5.7
AWS WAF offers cost-effective security by reducing the need for extra staff and effectively blocking threats.
Sentiment score
6.1
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway enhances ROI by reducing infrastructure costs, simplifying setup, and using cost management tools for accurate assessments.
With AWS WAF, it is easier for us to block unwanted malicious DDoS attacks and threats from coming into our web application.
Dev Ops Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway significantly impacts our cost savings while maintaining higher performance.
IT Manager at Chong Hua Hospital
If we can use a shared resource, then the return on investment is really nice.
Cloud Specialist at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
We have seen a return on investment in terms of time-saving and cost-saving by not creating our own infrastructure.
Information Security and Compliance Officer at Carnation
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.6
AWS WAF support is prompt and knowledgeable, but experiences vary in resolution speed and service costs.
Sentiment score
6.4
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway support experiences vary; some praise expertise, while others criticize delays and inconsistent quality.
Resolving issues can take time because the support personnel may lack product expertise, leading to delays.
Security Engineer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
They reach out when you send them a ticket, and within 24 hours or less, someone is able to get back to you to solve your problem.
Dev Ops Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
I would say they provide the best support for Application Gateway because they own the product, so their support is top-notch.
Cloud Specialist at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
There is room for improvement, specifically in paid support, by providing more direct contact.
Information Security and Compliance Officer at Carnation
I would rate Microsoft support as good because they have a very skilled technical support team in the background
Cloud Head at White-Spunner & Associates
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
AWS WAF is highly scalable, versatile for various infrastructures, but some users desire expanded features for broader adaptability.
Sentiment score
7.4
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway provides scalable solutions but has mixed reviews regarding cost and ease of scaling and upgrades.
AWS WAF does scale in the sense that it is fully managed and has automatic scaling.
Dev Ops Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is a very scalable product.
IT Manager at Chong Hua Hospital
It has the autoscaling feature, so there is not much concern around performance; it can scale significantly.
Cloud Specialist at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is a scalable solution.
Cloud Head at White-Spunner & Associates
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
AWS WAF is stable, effectively blocking threats, with minor issues in custom rules, and continuous improvements enhance reliability.
Sentiment score
7.6
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is stable and reliable, with high ratings, despite occasional issues due to misconfiguration.
Since it protects web applications from common attacks such as SQL injection and XSS, it is very stable.
Dev Ops Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
In terms of reliability, I would rate AWS WAF about six out of ten due to the need for improved signature sets.
Security Engineer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We faced issues with AWS WAF when writing the custom rules.
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
We have been using it for the past two to three years, and there have been good results with no problems so far.
Cloud Specialist at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
The stability is good, and except for a few instances, I don't see the non-availability of Azure Cloud services.
Cloud Head at White-Spunner & Associates
 

Room For Improvement

AWS WAF requires enhanced features, security, user interface, documentation, seamless integrations, and added automation for improved effectiveness.
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is criticized for high costs, complexity, lacking documentation, and needing improvements in security, scalability, and support.
Compared to firewalls, WAFs generally provide limited stateful analysis capabilities.
Security Engineer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
The way we see it now is just mentioned as a percentage from bots and actual users, which should include proper graphs and detailed information.
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
The level of granularity is not great, and as you cross a certain threshold, the cost goes up by twenty or thirty percent every time.
Security Engineer Dev Sec Ops at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
One feature I mentioned is the support for non-HTTPS protocols such as TCP, which could allow one endpoint for all kinds of protocols.
Cloud Specialist at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
There is room for improvement in terms of support, such as assigning agents directly for more straightforward engagement.
Information Security and Compliance Officer at Carnation
In future releases of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, I would like to see more AI functionalities and a better dashboard as well as some customizations.
IT Manager at Chong Hua Hospital
 

Setup Cost

AWS WAF pricing is seen as affordable but can be costly in high-demand scenarios like DDoS attacks.
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's cost is debated; appreciated for scalability but potentially expensive with additional fees compared to AWS.
Due to our status as an AWS shop, AWS WAF is cost-effective for us, and we benefit from discounts due to our extensive use of AWS services.
Security Engineer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
The licensing cost for AWS WAF is just pay-as-you-go; it is a service-based model.
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
We would prefer to have it cheaper, but it is still expensive.
Cloud Specialist at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Azure solutions are quite expensive.
Information Security and Compliance Officer at Carnation
When it comes to pricing for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, I would rate it a seven out of ten.
IT Manager at Chong Hua Hospital
 

Valuable Features

AWS WAF enhances security with configurable rules, seamless AWS integration, scalability, and ease of deployment for threat protection.
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway provides secure, efficient traffic management with integration, automation, and scalability benefits for straightforward application deployment.
The biggest benefit of AWS WAF for us is to filter malicious requests, so we can protect our environment and application from malicious actors.
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
It has also helped to improve the posture of our application, prevent all DDoS attacks, and unnecessary traffic and SQL injection that is reducing the performance of our application.
Dev Ops Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
The specific outcomes showing how AWS WAF has helped our organization include improving our security posture by reducing the attack surface and reducing malicious attacks.
Senior Cloud Security at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
We are using it for some of the security features for our applications, particularly for securing traffic in transit with SSL.
Information Security and Compliance Officer at Carnation
The Web Application Firewall (WAF) in Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has been very effective in protecting applications from security threats.
IT Manager at Chong Hua Hospital
The gateway's Web Application Firewall feature enhances security as it is the first entry point to your network from the outside world.
Cloud Head at White-Spunner & Associates
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Azure Application...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
10th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of AWS WAF is 3.9%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is 2.8%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AWS WAF3.9%
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway2.8%
Other93.3%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Azam S M - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
Has successfully filtered malicious traffic and allowed country-specific access controls
For improvement in AWS WAF, we can have better monitoring. One of the things that should be improved in AWS WAF is the monitoring; we need to identify the requests and where they are coming from. If it's a bot, we should differentiate the requests, whether they are automated or not. The way we see it now is just mentioned as a percentage from bots and actual users, which should include proper graphs and detailed information. We also need a feature where we can filter specific requests. If there are scripts in the requests, we should be able to filter those requests to see if there are any scripts running from them.
SS
Cloud Specialist at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Mutual TLS has secured our web services and now needs broader protocol support
The most valuable feature we have found in Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is mutual TLS. We find mutual TLS valuable because we can verify the client securely by setting up the trust certificate of the client, and also if we do it at the client side as well. This successfully develops mutual trust, ensuring that we know the client who is calling our service is a legitimate client. That is a very nice feature.Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has helped manage our traffic efficiently because we have many web services that we can put behind the same URL, and we can have different URLs with the same Application Gateway with a limited number of listeners. We can do host-based routing as well as URL-based routing or path-based routing. It supports both, so we can have even a single URL supporting many applications, or we can have different URLs for different applications respectively. We have both use cases.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
912,788 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise28
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business23
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

What are the limitations of AWS WAF vs alternative WAFs?
Hi Varun, I have had experienced with several WAF deployments and deep technical assessments of the following: 1. Imperva WAF 2. F5 WAF 3. Polarisec Cloud WAF Typical limitations on cloud WAF is t...
How does AWS WAF compare to Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS WAF?
AWS WAF is affordable; it depends on the number of rules you apply. The licensing cost for AWS WAF is just pay-as-you-go; it is a service-based model.
What's the difference between Azure Front Door and Application Gateway?
We found Azure Front Door to be easily scaled and very stable. The implementation is very fast and Microsoft provides excellent support. Azure Front Door can quickly detect abnormalities before the...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Regarding the pricing and licensing of Application Gateway, it is not cheap because the version we are using is WAF V2, and we are also using DDoS Premium Protection. I think the price of WAF on Ap...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Overall, I would rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway seven out of ten. It can be improved; for example, one feature I mentioned is the support for non-HTTPS protocols such as TCP, which could ...
 

Also Known As

AWS Web Application Firewall
Azure Application Gateway, MS Azure Application Gateway
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
Lilly, AccuWeather, AIRFRANCE, Honeywell
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS WAF vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
912,788 professionals have used our research since 2012.