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

HAProxy vs Sucuri 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)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HAProxy
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
13th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
47
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (3rd), Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (6th), Bot Management (7th), Service Mesh (2nd)
Sucuri
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
35th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (26th), Domain Name System (DNS) Security (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is 4.7%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HAProxy is 2.2%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sucuri is 1.5%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall4.7%
HAProxy2.2%
Sucuri1.5%
Other91.6%
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.
Shrinivas Devarkonda - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of DevOps at TripFactory
Handles high traffic efficiently and simplifies complex routing with rule-based logic
I think HAProxy is good as it stands now, but I believe there could be improvements. gRPC has recently been implemented, which is great, along with TLS 1.2 and 1.3 support, and HTTP 2.0 is also available. However, I'm unsure about the benchmark of those HTTP 2.0 requests on HAProxy. If there were any other protocol with better performance than HTTP 2.0, or perhaps mTLS and other similar features, including that in HAProxy would be really great. For improvements, I think that during setup and configuration, the steps provided are neat and clear. Anyone can easily install and configure it. There are many kernel tuning parameters also available, which is great. For specific improvement, in terms of logging, I think printing the full object of the request may help, or if there's a way to reference two requests, it would be beneficial to find a complete session history from a logged-in customer, as it would help analyze customer and user analytics.
JS
Hardware Engineer at Ministry of Defense
A cost-effective choice for website security and informative support with issues related to CDN quality
One area where they could improve is in providing real-time support options because now you need to open a support ticket and wait for their response. It would greatly benefit customers if they implemented an online chat or messaging system for quicker assistance. I have found their Content Delivery Network service to be lacking in quality, and it could certainly be enhanced to provide better performance. I would also like to see improvements in the deployment process, as it currently takes more time than desirable. Another significant concern is that their service when your website is down, turns it into a static site. This means that if customers try to visit your site during downtime, they will see old content from the static site, which is not ideal. The CDN and tracking services are areas that need improvement, as well as addressing their bandwidth limitations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Technical support has a very fast response time and they are helpful."
"We extensively use the solution every day. The solution is very stable; we haven’t seen any glitches."
"The product has improved our security posture by blocking bad actors."
"It's pretty convenient and pretty easy to set up and run. And then kind of for static content, it also offers caching."
"The security features are valuable. The particular feature we use is called OWASP."
"Very glad the WAF rulesets works out of box, and requires very little tuning or maintenance."
"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."
"The solution protects our application, which runs on the HTTP protocol, from DDoS attacks."
"Tech support is super-quick to respond, and always on target with answers specific to the current issue."
"Load balancing is valuable, and we are also using the WAF feature."
"Overall, it's a good solution."
"The stability is good and passed all tests."
"It is fast, flexible, and rock solid."
"We were able to use HAProxy for round robin with our databases, or for a centralized TCP connection in one host."
"​It has allowed us to evenly distribute the load across a number of servers, and check their health and automatically react to errors."
"Since the deployment is very easy and the open-source functionality saves a huge amount of cost in terms of project deployment."
"The initial setup was straightforward. Straight forward because the plugin can simply be installed and then it does its job. It's not complex, there is no learning curve. The online scan is simple, you put in the website address and the scan gives us a report on the browser itself. It's simple to use."
"Rather than locate some things manually, the Sucuri plugin scans and allows us to pinpoint whether there is malware or some problem in the site."
"It significantly eases the workload and streamlines the initial setup required to protect a website."
"I use it as a WAF, which is basically a web firewall to monitor and block traffic to our web server."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"The most valuable part is the analytics and visualization."
"For people who own a personal website, this solution is worth trying out since their security solution is somewhat full-fledged."
"Domain name scanning since it allows us to scan all our domain names and determine whether it has malware or if is reported as phishing."
 

Cons

"The rate limiting functionality could be enhanced, as we find it somewhat limited."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should include port forwarding features."
"Their documentation could be better. They don't have documentation that explains everything well."
"Its stability could be better."
"The accuracy of the Cloudflare Web Application Firewall could be improved by reducing the number of false-negative alerts."
"Support can be challenging at times."
"They need to improve their support because getting a response for basic requests took around 48 hours, which is too long."
"The dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"There is no standardized document available. So, any individual has to work from scratch to work it out."
"They should introduce one feature that I know many people, including me, are waiting for: HAProxy should have provide hot-swipe for back-end servers. Also, they need a more detailed GUI for monitoring and configuration."
"If nbproc = 2, you will have two processes of HAProxy running. However, the stats of HAProxy will not be aggregated, meaning you don't really know the collective status in a single point of view."
"Maybe HAProxy could be more modular."
"Also, having multiple HAProxy nodes in High Availability mode requires the use of clustering software such as Pacemaker and Corosync which are very complex."
"We need to handle new connections by dropping, or queuing them while the HAProxy restarts, and because HAProxy does not handle split config files."
"Pricing, monitoring, and reports can be improved."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model. It could be cheaper."
"In terms of improvement, the cost factor is always there."
"It would greatly benefit customers if they implemented an online chat or messaging system for quicker assistance."
"I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. The reason is that we have found sometimes customers or Google saying that there is something wrong with the website but Sucuri says that the site is clean so we do have to look at the site manually which means that the Sucuri scan does not pick up anything and everything."
"Confident score: Currently it does not have one and there are cases that most websites flagged are false-positives."
"The reason is that we have found sometimes customers or Google saying that there is something wrong with the website but Sucuri says that the site is clean so we do have to look at the site manually which means that the Sucuri scan does not pick up anything and everything."
"The main improvement I would like to see is support for .NET applications. If they could include this feature, I would include more sites in the protection."
"Sucuri could provide help for specific security alerts in-line instead of requiring users to search for it in the help section."
"Confident score: Currently it does not have one and there are cases that most websites flagged are false-positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cloudflare offers different types of subscriptions for businesses, enterprises, and personal users, and the pricing is negotiable."
"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."
"The solution is expensive."
"It is not too pricey."
"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."
"It starts at $20 and can easily go up to $200 monthly"
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is more affordable than other solutions."
"The price is well worth it. HAProxy Enterprise Edition paid for itself within months, simply due to the resiliency it brings. It was a bit more expensive than we were originally interested in paying, but we are thankful we chose to go with HAProxy."
"It is free of cost."
"Test/lab virtual machines can be installed without a licence. They can't be used for performance testing but otherwise behave like production nodes."
"We use NGINX as well. However, because the health checks are a paid feature, I like to avoid it whenever possible​."
"I use the open-source version of the product. I don't have experience with the licensed version of the solution."
"If you don't have expertise then go with the licensed version. Otherwise, open-source is the best solution."
"Very good value for the money. One of the simplest licensing schemes in this category of products."
"The only cost is for the image manager, who is responsible for uploading the image, and that is trivial."
"I’d simply say it’s really worth it."
"The ROI has been very good. Because of the solution, I have a tax break. The site developers were not always experienced people. We used to pay more for cleaning up the site when it was infected. Now, we have peace of mind knowing that the solution will clean up the site and that we won't have to go through the unnecessary process of restoring it from a backup. The protection on the WAF and the measures for backups have also prevented our site from going down."
"Sucuri offers different plans, both the standard plan and an advanced plan. So there are different plans to choose from."
"It stands out as a more cost-effective option compared to other cloud-based security services like Cloudflare or JetPass."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise16
No data available
 

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...
Do you recommend HAProxy?
I do recommend HAProxy for more simple applications or for companies with a low budget, since HAProxy is a free, open...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for HAProxy?
Since we used the open-source version, we were not concerned about pricing, setup cost, or licensing.
What needs improvement with HAProxy?
HAProxy already provides many of the features that other solutions in the market are providing, such as Nginx, so I d...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cloudflare WAF
HAProxy Community Edition, HAProxy Enterprise Edition, HAPEE
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

crunchbase, udacity, marketo, okcupid, zendesk
Booking.com, GitHub, Reddit, StackOverflow, Tumblr, Vimeo, Yelp
The Loft Salon, Tom McFarlin, WPBeginner, Taylor Town, Everything Everywhere, Financial Ducks in a Row, Chubstr, Real Advice Gal, Sujan Patel, Wallao, List25, School the World
Find out what your peers are saying about HAProxy vs. Sucuri and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.