Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] vs Steelhead comparison

Citrix and Riverbed are both solutions in the WAN Optimization category. Additionally, 90% of Citrix users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 95% of Riverbed users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 12, 2025

Steelhead and Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] compete in the WAN optimization category, with Steelhead having an upper hand due to its Scalable Data Referencing (SDR) and advanced TCP optimization, providing faster LAN-like speeds in WAN environments.

Features: Steelhead offers Scalable Data Referencing (SDR), advanced TCP optimization, and substantial MPLS bandwidth enhancement through compression and data caching. Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] provides reliable connectivity, efficient load balancing for video and voice traffic, and flexible cloud management for extensive connectivity between branches.

Room for Improvement: Steelhead needs better handling of encrypted traffic and simplified setup for QoS alongside an improved RI OS upgrade process. Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] could benefit from lower costs, better integration with security features, and an improved user interface for diagnostics and configurations.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Steelhead focuses on physical deployment with strong on-premises support, though complex issues may require time-consuming assistance. Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] offers both on-premises and cloud flexibility, but some improvements in technical knowledge and responsiveness are needed despite efficient support.

Pricing and ROI: Steelhead has a high initial cost but offers significant ROI through bandwidth optimization, though licensing is complex. Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] provides various licensing options such as a perpetual license model and is perceived as costly, but users note cost savings and connectivity management ease as offsets to the price.

To learn more, read our detailed WAN Optimization Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

WAN Optimization

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,933 peers since 2012

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

Cloudflare Web Application ...

Featured Reviews

Dean Barisic

CTO at PlayNirvana

Advanced security reporting has protected high-traffic betting platforms from constant attacks

I don't see room for improvement to Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. One thing I don't know much about because we have a dedicated IT team for that, and I'm not involved with Cloudflare much anymore. But if I were to compare them to F5, I would like to see more features that F5 offers. F5 has an option to bring the whole infrastructure, the whole WAF and all their packages, Bot Management, and everything else on your infrastructure. You need to install certain services from their side, and then you can choose if you would like requests to hit your servers immediately or if requests need to be proxied through F5 backbone. That would be a nice addition because we have 90% of the traffic as legit traffic coming from whitelisted servers. If it comes from whitelisted servers, I don't need to go every request through the backbone; I could easily just IP whitelist everything. Then I could maybe have Bot Management on my infrastructure that drastically reduces the price of Cloudflare. I would like to see Push CDN more improved in the next release of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. And maybe something similar to Pushpin that Fastly has, which is an option where you can push messages that then can be scaled globally over the network. From our perspective, if we have a listener that listens for stock updates, I would just need to have one processor that pushes those updates to the Cloudflare API, and then Cloudflare would broadcast that message to all listeners. Cloudflare will check the order of the message, and if you, as a customer, are not connected or have some kind of network issue, when you reconnect, you will receive the latest state and missing updates.

Read full review

Rohit Ghorpade

Cloud Network Engineer at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees

A scalable solution for MCN controller but lacks technical supports, upgrades

There are a few things that can be improved, are domain-based routing and the slowness of virtual parts, and it may be due to the wrong configuration, which we have been unable to find out. Previously, we faced some issues with the slowness part. Apart from that, feature like end gateway level antivirus. We are currently using a NetFlow proxy to establish a virtual position for the NetFlow. Our current environment has many use cases, but we are not using them on the Citrix SD-WAN. When I navigate the NCL part, it involves configuration. I want to highlight this disadvantage. Sometimes, when we push the configuration, it tries to push it to all branch locations. This process takes a lot of time, nearly 30 minutes, to push a single change from the NCL. Overall, I don't think Citrix meets our use cases what we have. This is based on my feedback after using it for the past year and working on this Citrix SD-WAN. However, from my experience, it is the worst solution I have seen. There's no domain-based routing, which is horrible. That's why we are moving to other products. We have checked our use case requirements with Fortinet, Palo Alto, and they meet them. I will consider the PoC or another OEM. There are many things in the area you need to be prompt, like the automation part. If any link or device goes down, alerting notification, etc. We need to perform and highlight so many things to your management. This should be improved.

Read full review

Chaudhary Muhammad Moez Manzar

Senior manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees

Reduces operational costs through bandwidth optimization but struggles with high traffic licensing and complex deployments

The logs in Steelhead are fantastic. There is a deep level of logs such as top 10 docker and top 50 docker. I can check from the top 50 docker which type of application is optimizing well and which type of traffic is not optimized. Steelhead provides logs and percentage levels, which is good. I can see any type of log report, report security, different types of report availability, but it is not customizable. Overall, this is a good feature. Steelhead provides real-time optimization with graphs and tables on real-time optimization, informing us packet by packet including port, source IP, destination IP, and destination port number. This reporting and real-time monitoring is fantastic, although I faced a problem in Oracle. Steelhead mainly saves the money that needs to be paid to ISPs. My actual traffic is around 2 GB, but I purchased a link from the ISP for only around 700 to 800 MB. All the prices that need to be paid monthly to the ISP are saved, which is a significant saving for my company after using Riverbed.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We extensively use the solution every day. The solution is very stable; we haven’t seen any glitches."

"The integration of Cloudflare with Cloud Suite is its most valuable feature."

"Cloudflare is cheaper compared to Azure WAF, which I have considered before."

"Cloudflare WAF provides protection through rules and functionalities like Cloudflare's SDRAP."

"The impact of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's integration with existing web technologies on our site's performance and security measures is quite great, actually."

"Does a good job preventing web application attacks."

"The security features are valuable. The particular feature we use is called OWASP."

"I'm highly satisfied. It's remarkably user-friendly, enabling me to quickly identify issues, and deploy solutions, and it offers the necessary features."

More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall pros

"We are using it widely for the local record for SaaS-based applications. Another valuable feature is a local breakout."

"The most valuable feature of Citrix SD-WAN is customization. You are able to customize the solution to your needs."

"The solution's most valuable feature is load balancing."

"Downtime for branch offices is now almost zero. We have 100% real-time visibility into all of our lines. MPLS links have been replaced with lower-cost links, saving a larger percentage of line costs. Overall, I see SD-WAN as a must. And the Citrix SD-WAN product has delivered on expectations and exceeded them. (With later firmware updates we now have good firewall capabilities in the product too)."

"The zero-touch deployment is most valuable for us."

"They have a zero downtime failover mechanism, where, when there's a link failure or a link weakness, or bad link conditions, they provide the ability to fail back seamlessly."

"The main advantage of Citrix SD-WAN is that it enables fast communication between our branches and data centers. And, with its cloud management features, it also makes the process of adding new branches into our company network much easier."

"The reliability of connectivity is most valuable."

More Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] pros

"It is very easy to install the solution."

"Customer service is really efficient, Riverbed TAC access is quick and easy, and the service is globally valuable."

"Steelhead mainly saves the money that needs to be paid to ISPs; my actual traffic is around 2 GB, but I purchased a link from the ISP for only around 700 to 800 MB, and all the prices that need to be paid monthly to the ISP are saved, which is a significant saving for my company after using Riverbed."

"I find the most valuable to be the compression and exchange replication."

"SteelHead works from the application. I use it to optimize traffic from Amazon. It is mainly used for customers who need to increase the traffic to 33K. For other users, it has been more of an operation."

"Scalable data referencing is a great feature."

"Riverbed has excellent technical support."

More Steelhead pros

Cons

"We have noticed some latency when the call goes through the firewall. That could be improved."

"Their documentation could be better. They don't have documentation that explains everything well. They have documentation for everything you're looking for, but they lack a single piece of documentation to tie everything together. As a new user or beginner, it took us a little bit of time to figure out how to put all these things in place."

"We don't even use Cloudflare Bot Management because it's too expensive; you need to pay per request, and it's much cheaper to get one or two additional machines."

"It would be ideal if the solution offered better log integration and more integration with different platforms."

"The learning curve was steep initially."

"The user interface is very simple and straightforward, but users need knowledge about DNS to accomplish tasks."

"The reporting could be more granular."

"There could be an option to duplicate the cluster to maintain the consistency of rules."

More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall cons

"Citrix SD-WAN's knowledge base has a few missing things, so you may need to seek help from support."

"I would like to either see the price reduced or have it packaged with other products to give better value for the money."

"The only improvement for Citrix SD-WAN would be to lower its cost."

"I would like to see more customization to adjust for the WAN lock-out due to our unexpected power outages."

"The price is the only thing that could be improved. Citrix is not a cheap solution."

"The solution's licensing model could be improved."

"The reports need to be improved. We need to have them customized but they don't have that right now. I would like for them to have better system predictions. We don't have that right now. My system may be working fine right now but after making some changes, that can change."

"Customer Service: Not great - the first line support for this product is pretty much nil."

More Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] cons

"The traffic is passing, but Oracle DB traffic experiences lag and slowness due to Steelhead, while other applications perform fine."

"The Central Management Console (CMC) newly named SteelCentral Controller (SCC) has rudimentary netflow capabilities, but it doesn’t have particularly in-depth data."

"There was a significant challenge when moving from an older version to a newer one due to changed quality of service policies."

"Oracle DB traffic experiences lag and slowness due to Steelhead, while other applications perform fine."

"The advertised “fail open” feature doesn’t work as expected."

"Steelhead is considered an expensive solution in our country. On a scale of one to ten for expense, it would be rated an eight."

"One area for improvement is related to monitoring and visibility."

More Steelhead cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's pricing option needs to be more transparent for enterprise clients."

"It is not too pricey."

"We pay $210 per month for CloudFlare WAF."

"The annual licensing fee is $10,000 USD."

"The pricing model is very straightforward compared to the competition. You just pay per month for the product and usage."

"The solution is expensive."

"What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? I believe the pricing is not the best, but it's reasonable and acceptable. We also use the McAfee system in parallel. In terms of pricing, its okay - not great, but not bad either. It falls in the middle, which is acceptable. In terms of support licensing, last time, we were searching for a solution, and we considered products from resellers rather than directly from the cloud provider. However, the pricing we encountered was exceptionally high. As a result, we are inclined to select support from the reseller."

"It starts at $20 and can easily go up to $200 monthly"

More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall pricing and cost advice

"It's a little bit on the high side compared to the other products."

"I believe that Citrix SD-WAN is a good investment, but I do not have the information to be more specific."

"I'm not quite sure of the price ranges. Roughly, the hidden devices can scale up to $20K for one appliance. However, the branch CPs are USD $1,000 to $2,500."

"The price is relatively expensive."

"The price of the subscription should be cheaper."

"Citrix SD-WAN is quite an affordable product."

"As NetScaler is now, I find it quite pricey."

"It would be helpful to have a demo license available for customers who want to prove the concept and conduct a proof of concept (POC) before committing to the solution. This is particularly important for customers in Egypt who often require a demonstration of the solution's features and compatibility with their needs before making any investment or incurring costs. Providing a demo license would allow customers to assess whether the solution would meet their needs or not."

More Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] pricing and cost advice

"Across our 12 data centers, we spend around $150k annually."

"The solution is expensive and the service contacts are costly too. The cost of the device makes the value proposition borderline acceptable for us. The service contract fees we pay is approximately $30,000 annually."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which WAN Optimization solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

Marketing Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Manufacturing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

12%

Outsourcing Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Midsize Enterprise	5
Large Enterprise	10

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	14

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cloudflare Web Application Firewall?

The price of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is reasonable.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall?

I don't see room for improvement to Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. One thing I don't know much about because we...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Cloudflare Web Application Firewall?

We are using Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's advanced reporting and analytics tools with their Zero Trust, so e...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Citrix SD-WAN?

The solution's licensing model could be improved. Citrix SD-WAN is a good product from a technical point of view. How...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Citrix SD-WAN?

If a customer already has Citrix NetScaler and is not looking to change anything in their existing environment, we pr...

See all answers

What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?

We just did an assessment for our 47 datacenters around North America. The top two enterprise-level network monitorin...

See all answers

What do you like most about Riverbed Steelhead?

One of our most valuable features is Steelhead's cloud migration optimization. Moving to the cloud helped optimize ou...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Riverbed Steelhead?

I am currently working with Riverbed for replication between PR to DR for synchronization purposes, and for WAN optim...

See all answers

Comparisons

Fortinet FortiWeb vs Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

Compared 8% of the time

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

Compared 7% of the time

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

Compared 6% of the time

Azure Web Application Firewall vs Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

Compared 6% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

Compared 5% of the time

More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall Competitors

Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]

Compared 24% of the time

Prisma SD-WAN vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]

Compared 13% of the time

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]

Compared 12% of the time

VMware VeloCloud SD-WAN vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]

Compared 11% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]

Compared 9% of the time

More Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] Competitors

Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform vs Steelhead

Compared 11% of the time

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs Steelhead

Compared 10% of the time

WAAS vs Steelhead

Compared 7% of the time

Exinda vs Steelhead

Compared 7% of the time

Aryaka Unified SASE Platform vs Steelhead

Compared 6% of the time

More Steelhead Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

March 2026

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall report

Download Cloudflare Web Application Firewall product report

Buyer's Guide

Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]

March 2026

Download Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

Steelhead

February 2026

Download Steelhead product report

Also Known As

Cloudflare WAF

Citrix CloudBridge, WOC, NetScaler SD-WAN

RIverbed Steelhead

Overview

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's intuitive dashboard enables users to build powerful rules through easy clicks and also provides Terraform integration. Every request to the WAF is inspected against the rule engine and the threat intelligence curated from protecting over 27 Million websites. Suspicious requests can be blocked, challenged or logged as per the needs of the user while legitimate requests are routed to the destination, agnostic of whether it lives on-premise or in the cloud. Analytics and Cloudflare Logs enable visibility into actionable metrics for the user.

Cloudflare

Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] enhances connectivity and performance by optimizing bandwidth utilization, ensuring reliable communication across branch offices and headquarter data centers. It offers centralized management, efficient deployment options, and improved network reliability.

Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] is designed for businesses seeking enhanced connectivity solutions that boost application performance while reducing costs. With HDX WAN Optimization and reliable Active-Active connectivity, it assures improved bandwidth management. Tailored for both cloud and on-premise deployments, it supports fast communication and seamless integration, making it user-friendly even for those with limited technical expertise. Security features and zero-touch deployments further enhance its appeal. However, users highlight areas needing improvement, such as configuration intuitiveness, pricing alignment for specific markets, and stability. Enhanced reporting, networking features, and technical support are desired. Integration with Windows, security elements like firewalls, and licensing clarity require attention to meet user expectations.

What are the key features of Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]?

HDX WAN Optimization: Enhances application performance and traffic.
Load Balancing: Ensures efficient traffic distribution across networks.
Reliable Connectivity: Provides seamless failover and reduced costs through MPLS replacement.
Cloud Management: Simplifies deployment and management via the cloud.
Zero-Touch Deployment: Facilitates easy setup and provisioning.
Active-Active Lines: Optimizes bandwidth utilization and performance.
Backup Capabilities: Centralizes data management for security.

What benefits should users look for in Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]?

Enhanced Connectivity: Improves stability and reduces downtime.
Cost Reduction: Efficiently decreases expenses by replacing MPLS.
Network Optimization: Offers better bandwidth for diverse communication types.
Secure Interconnectivity: Ensures secure and reliable network connections.
Management Flexibility: Supports cloud or on-premise deployment options.

Industries benefit from Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] by leveraging its features to ensure stable, redundant connectivity between branches and data centers. Organizations experiencing frequent line failures or high reliance on bandwidth-heavy applications find it particularly useful. It caters to sectors needing reliable data management and enhanced networking.

Citrix

Steelhead is the leading network optimization and application performance solution chosen by over 30,000 organizations worldwide. The performance of networks and applications directly impacts business productivity. Riverbed draws from nearly two decades of experience in driving network and application performance over Wide Area Networks with its flagship offering, SteelHead. SteelHead delivers the underlying technology that helps enterprises of all sizes maximize the efficiency and performance of the networks and applications used to run modern business.

SteelHead is proven to dramatically speed up the performance of applications anywhere in the organization while delivering the best end-user experience even under sub optimal network conditions. Reduce bandwidth utilization by up to 95%, deferring costly network bandwidth upgrades. Increase performance by up to 100x for on-premises applications.

Riverbed

Sample Customers

crunchbase, udacity, marketo, okcupid, zendesk

AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Cornerstone Home Lending Inc., Dallara, ecVision, Essar, Eurofred, Groupe Promutuel, HMSHost Corporation, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines Ltd, Royal Caribbean International

ElAraby, SFK Leblanc, Bobst Group, Northwest Pipe Company, Halkbank, Tradebridge, EFG Hermes

Find out what your peers are saying about Riverbed, Cato Networks, Hewlett Packard Enterprise and others in WAN Optimization. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best WAN Optimization vendors and best WAN Edge vendors.

We monitor all WAN Optimization 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.