No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Comodo cWatch vs F5 Rules for AWS WAF comparison

Sponsored
 

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

Cloudflare Web Application ...
Sponsored
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Comodo cWatch
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
37th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
CDN (28th)
F5 Rules for AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Business Rules Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is 4.0%, down from 5.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Comodo cWatch is 1.4%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 Rules for AWS WAF is 0.4%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall4.0%
F5 Rules for AWS WAF0.4%
Comodo cWatch1.4%
Other94.2%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

DB
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.
Bernardo Murillo - PeerSpot reviewer
Director De Netquatro at Netquatro
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.
Vibin Thomas - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Team Lead - Content Security at Valuepoint Systems
Advanced protection has reduced web attacks and improves application performance and operations
One area where F5 Rules for AWS WAF can be improved is in simplifying the tuning process. While F5 Rules for AWS WAF is powerful, fine-tuning it to match specific application behavior can sometimes be complex and time-consuming, especially for teams without deep WAF expertise. Another improvement could be enhanced visibility and reporting. Although AWS WAF provides logs, having more intuitive and built-in dashboards or clearer categorization of rule triggers would make it easier to quickly identify and analyze attack patterns. Additionally, expanding the capabilities around bot management and behavior analysis would be beneficial compared to some dedicated bot management solutions. More advanced detection techniques could further strengthen the protection against sophisticated automated traffic. Finally, providing more predefined templates or best practice recommendations for different application types would help speed up the deployment and reduce the initial configuration effort.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution protects our application, which runs on the HTTP protocol, from DDoS attacks."
"It is a SaaS solution unlike much of the competition."
"Cloudflare has positively impacted my organization by making it easier for me to handle and set up DNS for multiple clients; I can easily go in and access their accounts, make changes they need, and it's a one-stop shop."
"Cloudflare is cheaper compared to Azure WAF, which I have considered before."
"For us, the key feature of Cloudflare is DDoS protection and IP hiding, especially since we are a crypto company."
"Very glad the WAF rulesets works out of box, and requires very little tuning or maintenance."
"The integration of Cloudflare with Cloud Suite is its most valuable feature."
"It's pretty convenient and pretty easy to set up and run. And then kind of for static content, it also offers caching."
"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 solution is very good and I feel more secure under this than I did under Symantec or McAfee."
"They took my website under their surveillance, scanned the website for infection, detected the incident, and removed it in a jiff."
"We get alerts if we have some malware."
"My customers see ROI in the sense that their whole environment is secure."
"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
"F5 Rules for AWS WAF has positively impacted our organization for security through the implementation of traffic rules in our application."
"F5 Rules for AWS WAF is a strong, enterprise-focused solution for organizations that need robust web application security, centralized policy management, and better visibility into application layer threats within AWS environments."
"Overall, the combination of reduced manual effort, improved security posture, and better application performance has delivered a strong return on investment."
"F5 Rules for AWS WAF's OWASP protection and bot protection have reduced attacks on my applications by 72 to 90%."
"F5 Rules for AWS WAF is definitely recommended. It is a good tool for anyone to try and see if it matches their use case, and it is something that an organization can really benefit from."
"I advise anyone looking for a great tool to secure their public-facing applications to start using F5 Rules for AWS WAF."
"After implementing F5 Rules for AWS WAF, we observed a reduction of approximately 60 to 70% in web application security incidents reaching our application team, particularly blocking common threats like bot traffic and SQL injections without impacting our downstream systems."
"In the past few years, we have zero security incidents, indicating a return on investment."
 

Cons

"The rate limiting functionality could be enhanced, as we find it somewhat limited."
"There could be an option to duplicate the cluster to maintain the consistency of rules."
"Its stability could be better."
"The reporting could be improved if it were more granular."
"We have noticed some latency when the call goes through the firewall. That could be improved."
"The product can improve by having more multitenancy capability, which is currently not available."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should improve visibility for a customer."
"The dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
"Better CDN could be a great thing since this is the best that any website owners would be interested in for protecting their website."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"The portal is a little slow."
"I think F5 Rules for AWS WAF could be improved mainly around visibility, specifically having more actionable recommendations for false positives."
"One area where F5 Rules for AWS WAF can be improved is in simplifying the tuning process."
"An area for improvement I see is that while everything is in good shape, I demand continuous improvisation of these rule sets."
"F5 Rules for AWS WAF could be improved with deeper integration with Infrastructure as Code tools like Terraform for simplification, as well as more AI-driven recommendations for rules tuning to reduce false positives and better dashboards for visibility at the CXO level."
"There are potential false positives in F5 Rules for AWS WAF that sometimes require tuning."
"From an improvement standpoint, one area where F5 Rules for AWS WAF could improve is in simplifying policy management and making advanced configurations more intuitive, especially for teams that are newer to enterprise WAF technologies."
"F5 Rules for AWS WAF can be improved by simplifying the tuning process to reduce false positives and providing more built-in dashboards for better visibility and further customization."
"The additional costs for F5 Rules for AWS WAF are quite high, as F5 managed rules require a separate subscription on top of the standard AWS WAF charges; it would be great if it would be pre-integrated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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 is not too pricey."
"The solution is expensive."
"Cloudflare offers different types of subscriptions for businesses, enterprises, and personal users, and the pricing is negotiable."
"The solution's pricing option needs to be more transparent for enterprise clients."
"Comodo cWatch’s first level, which has fewer features, costs $7."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Construction Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Hospitality Company
8%
Construction Company
33%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Computer Software Company
6%
Energy/Utilities Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

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...
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 Rules for AWS WAF?
My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing for F5 Rules for AWS WAF was good with purchasing and the s...
What needs improvement with F5 Rules for AWS WAF?
From an improvement standpoint, one area where F5 Rules for AWS WAF could improve is in simplifying policy management...
What is your primary use case for F5 Rules for AWS WAF?
My main use case for F5 Rules for AWS WAF is strengthening web application security for internet-facing applications ...
 

Also Known As

Cloudflare WAF
cWatch
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

crunchbase, udacity, marketo, okcupid, zendesk
Xerox, Intel, HP, UPS, Western Union, Western Digital
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Comodo cWatch vs. F5 Rules for AWS WAF and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.