We compared Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is praised for its load balancing capabilities, SSL termination, and integration with Azure services. Users are satisfied with customer support, reasonable pricing, and positive ROI. Improvement areas include scalability and user interface. Cloudflare Web Application Firewall excels in website security, customer service, integration with Cloudflare services, and competitive pricing. Users appreciate its user-friendly interface and detailed reporting capabilities. Areas for enhancement include customization options, response times, and ease of use.
Features: The valuable features of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway include excellent load balancing capabilities and seamless integration with other Azure services. On the other hand, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is highly praised for its ability to enhance website security and effectively block malicious traffic. Additionally, it offers comprehensive reporting capabilities and seamless integration with other Cloudflare services.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is minimal and the pricing is considered fair by customers. On the other hand, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall offers competitive pricing with straightforward setup costs and users appreciate the flexibility of licensing options available., Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has positive ROI with efficient and reliable performance, cost-effectiveness, scalability, flexibility, and ease of use. Cloudflare Web Application Firewall also results in significant financial gains.
Room for Improvement: Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has room for improvement in terms of scalability, performance, user interface, documentation, and support resources. On the other hand, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall could benefit from enhancements in customization options, response times, ease of use, and interface simplification.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway revealed varying durations for deployment and setup, ranging from three months and an additional week to just one week for both phases. On the other hand, reviews for Cloudflare Web Application Firewall also showed variations in the time required, with some users mentioning three months for deployment and a week for setup, while others reported one week for both phases. Context is crucial for accurate evaluation., Regarding customer service and support, both Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall receive positive remarks from users. Azure's support is praised for its responsiveness, expertise, and helpfulness in resolving issues. On the other hand, Cloudflare's support is commended for its prompt addressing of issues and clear instructions, making users feel supported and confident in using the product.
The summary above is based on 32 interviews we conducted recently with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The integration of Cloudflare with Cloud Suite is its most valuable feature."
"We like that there's load balancing, firewall capabilities, DDoS protection, et cetera, all covered by Cloudflare."
"The solution protects our application, which runs on the HTTP protocol, from DDoS attacks."
"Caching is the most valuable feature of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall."
"Someone with a basic understanding of networking and security will be able to implement the firewall's basic features within 15 minutes."
"The Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's most valuable feature is its ease of configuration."
"We extensively use the solution every day. The solution is very stable; we haven’t seen any glitches."
"I'm highly satisfied. It's remarkably user-friendly, enabling me to quickly identify issues, and deploy solutions, and it offers the necessary features."
"The most valuable feature is WAF."
"It does an excellent job of load balancing."
"I like the tool's stability and performance."
"The health probe is pretty good for your backend health. It tells you whether it's communicating and talking to the endpoint correctly. It is quite useful."
"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"We find it valuable because it is compatible with our existing Azure solution."
"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 ModSecurity core rules need to be updated."
"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."
"A key challenge arises when dealing with numerous integrations with HVAC systems. Depending on the specifics, there might be some configuration mismatches, which necessitate specific support."
"The reporting could be more granular."
"If they add logs history within the Cloudflare offering, that would be a great benefit."
"It would be ideal if the solution offered better log integration and more integration with different platforms."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should include port forwarding features."
"Its stability could be better."
"Scalability can be an issue."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
"The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly."
"The solution should provide more security for certificate-based services so that we can implement more security on that."
"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."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's first deployment is complex. It needs to improve its pricing."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is ranked 7th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 16 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews. Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall writes "A cloud solution for web application firewall protection with rate-limiting, managed, and custom firewall rules". 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". Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is most compared with Akamai App and API Protector, AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door and NGINX App Protect, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, AWS WAF and HAProxy. See our Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway report.
See our list of best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors.
We monitor all Web Application Firewall (WAF) 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.