Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Azure Front Door vs Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Azure Front Door
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
18th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
CDN (2nd), Web Application Firewall (WAF) (14th)
Microsoft Purview Insider R...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
29th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Insider Risk Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Azure Front Door is 2.4%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management is 1.9%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Azure Front Door2.4%
Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management1.9%
Other95.7%
Microsoft Security Suite
 

Featured Reviews

Renato Roque - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamless global application delivery with features like efficient load balancing, web application firewall and robust traffic routing capabilities
I find the WAF policy to be exceptionally valuable as it adds a layer of security protection to our applications. I particularly appreciate its load-balancing capabilities as it allows us to manage multiple instances and support a global presence effectively. From a performance standpoint, users can connect to the Front Door, and the load balancer directs them to the nearest origin location. This aspect has been a key factor in enhancing our user experience with Azure Front Door, making it a scalable solution that positively impacts performance.
Karthik Ekambaram - PeerSpot reviewer
Have consistently built secure internal environments while implementing compliance tools for diverse customer needs
The customizable alerts system needs improvement. The detection rules are not extensive enough. There should be more possibilities for creating alerts based on additional criteria. While rules can be customized, the available criteria for creating detection rules should be expanded. Microsoft's pricing is very expensive. The Business Premium offering should be extended to enterprise customers, as it's currently limited to 300 users. There should be a tier below E5 that includes Microsoft Purview and other features. Currently, E5 licensing costs approximately 6,000 INR per user per month including taxes. Competitive solutions offer similar functionality at about 50% of Microsoft's cost. Email DLP is included in Business Premium or P1 licenses, while P2 licenses cover endpoint DLP and additional channels. Microsoft should introduce an intermediate tier below E5 that covers all P1 licenses, as customers often need coverage across the entire M365 suite.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Azure Front Door provides DDoS protection and features related to WAF."
"The most valuable feature is that you can implement resources globally. It does not depend on location and ability or something like that. This is to connect clients around the world."
"I find the technical support excellent, and I rate it a ten."
"Azure Front Door's advanced routing rules for traffic management are highly effective, allowing you to configure HTTP tags, change different header or header response values, configure origin domains, and add security to your Layer 7 using these routing rules."
"I am impressed with the tool's integrations."
"The web application firewall is a great feature."
"Rules Engine is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is that I can have CDN and load-balancing capabilities in a single service instead of managing two separate tools."
"Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management was helpful in performing investigations after alerts were received."
"Insider Risk Management's graphing is highly specific and useful. You can see the last six months of data for the Microsoft tenant. You can easily find what you need. For example, you can filter for alerts about devices, emails, etc."
"The scoring mechanism is exceptional because it eliminates the need to reinvent criteria for identifying risks, misconfigurations, or vulnerabilities."
"The best thing about Purview is that it's easy to integrate with our day-to-day environment. We have Active Directory, and Word and Excel. Using a third-party vendor and trying to integrate with our existing environment would be much more challenging."
 

Cons

"This is a relatively expensive solution."
"The user interface needs improvement as it is difficult to create the mapping to link the problem with your private address sources."
"The product's features are limited compared to Cloudflare. The tool also doesn't work well in a hybrid environment. I would like to see a way to add personalized APIs in the system."
"In the tool, there needs to be a good amount of monitoring in the area of health probes to capture in front of what is happening."
"I'm responsible for the governance and cost control of Azure. I'm not a specialist in any products and therefore I couldn't really speak effectively to features that are lacking or missing."
"The tool should improve its cost."
"The product needs to improve its latency."
"There could be improvements regarding its pricing for large-scale projects."
"The reporting capabilities sometimes leave a little to be desired. It could be improved in terms of producing reports to provide information to the C-suite or others."
"For certain things, you need to install an agent. I understand it's for integrity, but if there could be a clientless solution for certain aspects, it would make life easier."
"Microsoft's pricing is very expensive. The Business Premium offering should be extended to enterprise customers, as it's currently limited to 300 users."
"The user interface also isn't user-friendly. When we introduce Insider Risk Management to our clients, they often find it difficult to understand. There is too much information, and the UI is not scalable. Also, entry-level IT technicians are not always interested in learning something new. It should be clearer and easier to understand."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The transition to the premium tier has led to increased costs, making it more expensive than the classic tier."
"Considering the standard licensing of the tool, even though we have not checked the billing as of now, it might not be very costly."
"The solution is a bit expensive."
"The pricing of the solution is good."
"The product is expensive."
"It is on a pay-as-you-go basis."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
869,513 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
37%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Comms Service Provider
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise9
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 Azure Front Door?
I am not sure about the pricing but believe Azure Front Door might require a higher cost due to its entry point nature.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management?
The reporting capabilities sometimes leave a little to be desired. It could be improved in terms of producing reports to provide information to the C-suite or others.
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management?
The primary use case for Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management was data loss prevention. This was my main objective.
What advice do you have for others considering Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management?
I would recommend Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management to others. I would rate the overall solution as a nine.
 

Also Known As

Azure Front-Door
Microsoft Insider Risk Management
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Front Door vs. Microsoft Purview Insider Risk Management and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,513 professionals have used our research since 2012.