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

Comodo cWatch vs F5 Advanced WAF comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 1, 2025

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

Comodo cWatch
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
28th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
CDN (13th)
F5 Advanced WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Comodo cWatch is 0.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 Advanced WAF is 11.1%, up from 10.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Bernardo Murillo - PeerSpot reviewer
Alerts organizations if any malware is detected and removes it quickly
The solution allows me to change my logo. It gives me a white-label portal because I am a partner. OWASP has been the most effective in malware prevention. It can detect if the headers are okay and do FTP scans. We get alerts if we have some malware. It is removed very quickly.
Ahmed Moamen - PeerSpot reviewer
Protects applications with versatile authentication features
F5 offers a versatile solution that can be integrated with APM in cases where integration with an external IDB is needed. It is useful for authentication backup if the on-prem directory service is unavailable. Additionally, its WAF functionality is valuable for protecting applications from attacks. It is a versatile and strong solution that's easy to understand and deploy.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We get alerts if we have some malware."
"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
"The FIM feature, the information in the new management system, and their support are the most valuable features. The scanned results are quite fast as compared to other platforms compared to scanning timing. It takes about a minute or two minutes. Also, the results of the Comodo scan results are in detail."
"The initial setup was was easy to install."
"It's flexible and powerful, and the users can input their own rules to the system."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution uses AI to protect against botnet attacks."
"Web attack signatures are very important for detecting web attacks."
"The support experience is better than average."
"Despite a few issues, F5 Advanced WAF is performing well for me."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the easy identification of events and customization. We can pinpoint our settings."
 

Cons

"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"The portal is a little slow."
"The solution could improve by having an independent capture module. It has a built feature that you can deploy the capture on your published website. However, it's not very user-friendly. When you compare this feature to Google Capture or other enterprise captures, they are very simple. It needs a good connection to the F5 Advanced WAF sandbox. When you implement this feature in the data center, you may suffer some complications with connecting to the F5 Advanced WAF sandbox. This should be improved in the future."
"People who want to work with the device have to be pro in Linux"
"F5 Advanced WAF could improve on its funding for WAF features. There is a need to be more advanced WAF features."
"The reporting portion of F5 Advance WAF is not great. They need to work out something better, as it is very basic. You only see the top IPs, I think there is more they can offer."
"Users would like to have an additional IP intelligence license to handle this within WAF itself without needing to engage with the SOC team."
"There is a learning curve that extends the time of implementation."
"One thing that can be improved, is to increase the quantity over predefine policy."
"The BIG-IQ is supposed to centralize the management for all of the boxes but it's not very effective."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Comodo cWatch’s first level, which has fewer features, costs $7."
"The price of the solution is reasonable when compared with other products, such as FortiWeb. I am very satisfied with the price."
"F5 Advanced WAF's pricing is high."
"There is an annual subscription for this solution."
"The pricing of F5 Advanced WAF is more expensive than other solutions like Radware and CD18, it is quite high."
"Pricing for this solution is higher than average."
"A yearly license for F5 Advanced WAF is expensive."
"Licensing fees for this solution are paid on a yearly basis."
"The price of F5 Advanced WAF could improve it is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Comodo cWatch?
The portal is a little slow. I have to wait for it to load all the information. CDN's performance must be improved.
What is your primary use case for Comodo cWatch?
I use the solution to detect vulnerabilities in the site.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Comodo cWatch?
Comodo cWatch’s price is very good compared to Cloudflare’s. The first level of Cloudflare costs us about $20. The next level costs $100. Comodo cWatch’s first level, which has fewer features, cost...
What do you like most about F5 Advanced WAF?
It's a fairly easy-to-use and user-friendly tool. My administrators and team also like its ability to customize the rules per the requirements.
What needs improvement with F5 Advanced WAF?
I do not have anything in mind right now that needs improvement. Generally, it works well. If we need any specific feature, we approach F5 directly.
 

Also Known As

cWatch
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Xerox, Intel, HP, UPS, Western Union, Western Digital
MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Comodo cWatch vs. F5 Advanced WAF and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.