We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiADC and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I am impressed with the product's load-balancing feature."
"Although FortiADC has multiple features that I like, the global DNS is the most helpful. It is primarily useful for customers with huge environments and at least two data centers. FortiADC can act as your DNS server. It can check which data center has the lowest latency, and route traffic to that one. It's an intelligent DNS."
"Content caching and content compression are good features."
"The solution provides high-level services such as availability, redundancy, and load balancing between servers."
"It's a good product because it supports all the features that ADC solutions in the market can support, like F5 solutions, for example, such as the LTM of F5."
"TSL and SSL offloading are both very good features."
"Key features include SSL Offloading, VM availability, and L7 load balancing."
"The most valuable feature is its simplicity."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF)."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use."
"We chose this solution in the first place because it has access to Layer 7. I can control the requests and the content, which I can access on my network if I want to even if it's forbidden access to other external resources. If I want to monitor, for example, traffic, and apply this rule on Layer 7, I can do so. This was our main goal when implementing this application. We wanted to take advantage of the Gateway capabilities."
"The solution provides great automation and it is easy to upgrade service."
"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 solution is easy to set up."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"Setup could be easier. The company's homework is to redesign those menus to configure with the smallest number of steps."
"Fortinet has some drawbacks, and it can be a bit challenging to scale."
"Because it is so generic, the documentation requires special attention. A person who has not worked on Fortinet FortiADC or a similar product will struggle to understand what the document is trying to say. The documentation could be more specific, and more detailed."
"I think it would be helpful if Fortinet put more video examples on their cookbook site."
"The L7 Persistent load-balancing algorithm has not worked for me after having tested it many times with my customer's in-house application. I'd like to suggest that the company make sure that all load-balancing algorithms work properly with most applications, even those that are in-house apps."
"It would be good if they built in a fully functional web application firewall."
"The product's stability for VMs could be better."
"The solution's WAF needs an upgrade because it is not as good as FortiWeb, VMware, F5, or Imperva."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"Microsoft needs to work on their documentation."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway could improve by allowing features to use more third-party tools."
"The solution has many limitations. You cannot upgrade the VPN to the application gateway. So I started with version one, which has limited capabilities, and they provided version two. And unfortunately, I cannot upgrade from v one to v two like other services. So I have to decommission the version one and create a new one with version two. Also the version one was complex with the certificates uploading the SQL certificates."
"The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly."
"The security of the product could be adjusted."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's first deployment is complex. It needs to improve its pricing."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiADC is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 19 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 4th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews. Fortinet FortiADC is rated 7.8, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiADC writes "High-level load balancing and routing protocols but scalability is limited to 200 gigabits". 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". Fortinet FortiADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiWeb, Citrix NetScaler, Kemp LoadMaster and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Citrix NetScaler, AWS WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and Azure Front Door. See our Fortinet FortiADC vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.
