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

Comodo cWatch vs F5 Rules for AWS WAF comparison

 

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

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 (29th)
F5 Rules for AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
14th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Business Rules Management (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, 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 (%)
F5 Rules for AWS WAF0.4%
Comodo cWatch1.4%
Other98.2%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

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

"They took my website under their surveillance, scanned the website for infection, detected the incident, and removed it in a jiff."
"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
"My customers see ROI in the sense that their whole environment is secure."
"The solution is very good and I feel more secure under this than I did under Symantec or McAfee."
"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."
"We get alerts if we have some malware."
"In the past few years, we have zero security incidents, indicating a return on investment."
"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."
"F5 Rules for AWS WAF has positively impacted us by improving our web application security without adding too much operational overhead."
"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."
"F5 Rules for AWS WAF has positively impacted our organization for security through the implementation of traffic rules in our application."
"Overall, the combination of reduced manual effort, improved security posture, and better application performance has delivered a strong return on investment."
"I advise anyone looking for a great tool to secure their public-facing applications to start using F5 Rules for AWS WAF."
"F5 Rules for AWS WAF should be highly recommended for AI applications, as security is a major concern, and using F5 helps prevent security issues and stabilizes organizations and applications."
 

Cons

"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 portal is a little slow."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"It's too early to talk about a return on investment with F5 Rules for AWS WAF."
"One area where F5 Rules for AWS WAF can be improved is in simplifying the tuning process."
"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."
"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."
"I think F5 Rules for AWS WAF could be improved mainly around visibility, specifically having more actionable recommendations for false positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Hospitality Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
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
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

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 setup cost.
What needs improvement with F5 Rules for AWS WAF?
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-integr...
What is your primary use case for F5 Rules for AWS WAF?
F5 Rules for AWS WAF manages the security rule set by applying the rules and setting the block directly in AWS WAF to provide advanced protection against web application attacks, bots, threats, and...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

cWatch
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.