We performed a comparison between Citrix ADC vs Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Users give a similar rating to both solutions. Each solution has an easy deployment, similar opinions on pricing, and good technical support. However, they differ in their strengths and weaknesses in terms of features.
"Content Redirection and SSO integration with Citrix XenApp/XenDesktop. The GUI was wonderful."
"Manageability and visibility are good."
"Its customer support service is good."
"It is a complete solution for those looking for an all-in-one."
"We appreciate that this solution facilitates our access to Citrix internet."
"The load balancing is one of the most valuable features."
"Citrix NetScaler offers robust security features, including SmartAccess and customizable policies, making it a reliable choice for safeguarding user data."
"Scalability is great. One of the best features of NetScaler is that it can scale out."
"The security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF)."
"We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled."
"I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 1000 users who use it daily."
"Azure Application Gateway's most valuable feature is ease of use. The configuration is straightforward. It isn't difficult to adjust the size of your instances in the settings. You can do that with a few clicks, and the configuration file is the same way. You can also set rules and policies with minimal time and effort."
"The most valuable feature is WAF."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"It is a scalable solution...The installation phase of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is very easy."
"Quality assurance could improve by ironing out security vulnerabilities before releasing upgrades."
"They can improve the scalability and the multi-tenancy feature. We recently tried to configure an authentication, and we ran into some issues while using the web-based GUI. It was very slow when you log in with your credentials in the web-based GUI. Each time we clicked on the menu, it tried to do the authentication. It works properly in the console."
"It was challenging explaining to customers that it's no longer NetScaler but ADC, and now it's not just ADC but also the rebranding from NetScaler."
"The product provides some templates to integrate with applications like MS Exchange, MS SharePoint, SAP Enterprise Portal, and others. However, the last update for these templates was 2013 (lots of applications are running on versions newer then 2013)."
"Too many bugs in the software and it's always difficult when you need to update."
"The solution should be able to scale more effectively than it does."
"ADC from Citrix has added functionalities from other products and the usability is very difficult for someone who is used to a simpler user interface, it's a little bit of a mess to use."
"There are some features which are missing."
"The product's performance should be better."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"I want the solution's support to improve. The tool is also expensive."
"It could be more stable, and support could be better. It would also be better if they offered more features. For example, it lacks security features. Before we used another English solution, and we realized that some of the rules were not set up correctly and passed through the Application Gateway's English controllers. But the problem, in this case, is if you send ten rules, for example, six rules hit some issues. IP address blocking could be better. The rules, for example, don't work properly. If you have one issue, one rule or another rule will not work. This sounds like total madness to me."
"The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Citrix NetScaler is ranked 2nd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 85 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 4th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 38 reviews. Citrix NetScaler is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Citrix NetScaler writes "Optimizing application delivery and ensuring robust network performance with its excellent stability and comprehensive load-balancing capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". Citrix NetScaler is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiADC, HAProxy, Loadbalancer.org and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, F5 Advanced WAF, AWS WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and HAProxy. See our Citrix NetScaler vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
