We performed a comparison between Citrix Web App and API Protection and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."When our primary link goes down I can still get to my Cisco devices and the NetScaler devices on-prem because of the SDN solution. If the internet connection at one of the branches goes down, we can still route them, they still get internet based on the SDN solution through one of the other sites. They can carry on working."
"We have good customer support."
"Citrix is good for application protection."
"I prefer this solution because of its user-friendly interface. I find it simple and close to what I am currently using, which is Citrix Fortiva Access for Multi-Factor Authentication. I appreciate the familiar user interface and troubleshooting tools it offers."
"I like the solution's simplicity compared to Citrix's on-prem solutions."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"The work balancing applications are the most valuable feature."
"The advantage of Citrix Web App and API Protection is just its graphic user interface for beginners. The solution is nothing special, but we have to use it for the corporation. Another advantage of Citrix Web App and API Protection is that we have our copy to test things and get the know-how of it."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"I like the tool's stability and performance."
"The health probe is pretty good for your backend health. It tells you whether it's communicating and talking to the endpoint correctly. It is quite useful."
"The pricing is quite good."
"It has a filter available, although we are not currently using it because it is not part of our requirements. But it is a good option and when it becomes part of our requirements we will definitely use it."
"Good customization; able to report and take action on alerts."
"We find it valuable because it is compatible with our existing Azure solution."
"The solution's pricing is a big concern and should be improved."
"I am not an expert in this solution, but simplicity and user-friendly interfaces are crucial for me. I would appreciate advice from Citrix, particularly in the form of an interactive guide for API protection. It would be helpful if they could provide specific points and recommendations for cybersecurity, indicating areas that need attention or improvement. I find such interactive guidance valuable."
"The configuration for its web application firewall is complicated."
"Their upgrades are not very backward compatible, and sometimes they mess up."
"An area for improvement in Citrix Web App and API Protection is for it to give real-time notifications and alerts. It would be practical if the solution warns you if there's an attack or if the load or traffic volume increases or decreases. An additional feature I'd like to see in Citrix Web App and API Protection is a prediction or artificial intelligence on what is happening, for example, attacks."
"The product could be improved by making it easier to use and easier to implement."
"The setup was not simple."
"The user interface could be more friendly. Some wizards and other documentation for administrators, as well as some use cases, helps us to understand the solution."
"It could be more stable, and support could be better. It would also be better if they offered more features. For example, it lacks security features. Before we used another English solution, and we realized that some of the rules were not set up correctly and passed through the Application Gateway's English controllers. But the problem, in this case, is if you send ten rules, for example, six rules hit some issues. IP address blocking could be better. The rules, for example, don't work properly. If you have one issue, one rule or another rule will not work. This sounds like total madness to me."
"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."
"It takes a lot of time for a certificate to update in the system. That is a huge drawback, affecting the load-balancing side. And when there are changes to the load balancing, it affects the end-user."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"Scalability can be an issue."
"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."
"It could be easier to change servicing."
"The support can be improved when you are configuring the system rules. The Disaster Recovery feature can be added in the next release. The price of the solution can be reduced a bit."
More Citrix Web App and API Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Citrix Web App and API Protection is ranked 20th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 11 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews. Citrix Web App and API Protection is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Citrix Web App and API Protection writes "Has a good graphic user interface for beginners, but lacks real-time notifications, alerts, and artificial intelligence". 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". Citrix Web App and API Protection is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door, AWS WAF and Akamai App and API Protector, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Citrix Web App and API Protection vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway report.
See our list of best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors.
We monitor all Web Application Firewall (WAF) 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.
