We compared Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is praised for its load balancing capabilities, SSL termination, and integration with Azure services. Users are satisfied with customer support, reasonable pricing, and positive ROI. Improvement areas include scalability and user interface. Cloudflare Web Application Firewall excels in website security, customer service, integration with Cloudflare services, and competitive pricing. Users appreciate its user-friendly interface and detailed reporting capabilities. Areas for enhancement include customization options, response times, and ease of use.
Features: The valuable features of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway include excellent load balancing capabilities and seamless integration with other Azure services. On the other hand, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is highly praised for its ability to enhance website security and effectively block malicious traffic. Additionally, it offers comprehensive reporting capabilities and seamless integration with other Cloudflare services.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is minimal and the pricing is considered fair by customers. On the other hand, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall offers competitive pricing with straightforward setup costs and users appreciate the flexibility of licensing options available., Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has positive ROI with efficient and reliable performance, cost-effectiveness, scalability, flexibility, and ease of use. Cloudflare Web Application Firewall also results in significant financial gains.
Room for Improvement: Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has room for improvement in terms of scalability, performance, user interface, documentation, and support resources. On the other hand, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall could benefit from enhancements in customization options, response times, ease of use, and interface simplification.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway revealed varying durations for deployment and setup, ranging from three months and an additional week to just one week for both phases. On the other hand, reviews for Cloudflare Web Application Firewall also showed variations in the time required, with some users mentioning three months for deployment and a week for setup, while others reported one week for both phases. Context is crucial for accurate evaluation., Regarding customer service and support, both Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall receive positive remarks from users. Azure's support is praised for its responsiveness, expertise, and helpfulness in resolving issues. On the other hand, Cloudflare's support is commended for its prompt addressing of issues and clear instructions, making users feel supported and confident in using the product.
The summary above is based on 32 interviews we conducted recently with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Caching is the most valuable feature of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall."
"I'm highly satisfied. It's remarkably user-friendly, enabling me to quickly identify issues, and deploy solutions, and it offers the necessary features."
"The Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's most valuable feature is its ease of configuration."
"Does a good job preventing web application attacks."
"The security features are valuable. The particular feature we use is called OWASP."
"The product has improved our security posture by blocking bad actors."
"Technical support has a very fast response time and they are helpful."
"The product has a valuable security control functionality."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"The tool helps manage microservices by providing developers with a platform to conduct tests and assessments on the web application. The custom domain option is one of the most valuable features I've found. This feature is incredibly helpful for the end-users of the web application. With the custom domain feature, you can change the lengthy link to a shorter, more memorable one. For example, instead of using a lengthy default link, you can customize it to something like imail.com, which is much easier to remember and share."
"The most valuable feature is WAF."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable."
"The solution has built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure."
"The security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable."
"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."
"A key challenge arises when dealing with numerous integrations with HVAC systems. Depending on the specifics, there might be some configuration mismatches, which necessitate specific support."
"The accuracy of the Cloudflare Web Application Firewall could be improved by reducing the number of false-negative alerts."
"Its stability could be better."
"Their documentation could be better. They don't have documentation that explains everything well. They have documentation for everything you're looking for, but they lack a single piece of documentation to tie everything together. As a new user or beginner, it took us a little bit of time to figure out how to put all these things in place."
"The notification part could be improved. It's very much connected to Web Application Firewall, rate-limiting, and DDoS protection."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should include port forwarding features."
"I have experienced some difficulties with Cloudflare's support as a customer based in India."
"The platform's control features related to real-time authentication and response time need improvement."
"The pricing of the solution is a bit high. The solution should offer different pricing systems."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"The support provided for the solution has certain shortcomings that need improvement, especially when it comes to the response time from the support team."
"I believe that there is room for improvement in terms of additional functionality. It is an advantage to have features readily available for configuration without needing customer-defined rules."
"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."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"The increased security that we are considering is because of some of the things that the security team has brought to our attention. They have pointed out that we would most likely require a better web application firewall than Azure Application Gateway."
More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is ranked 7th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 16 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews. Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall writes "A cloud solution for web application firewall protection with rate-limiting, managed, and custom firewall rules". 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". Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is most compared with Akamai App and API Protector, AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door and NGINX App Protect, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and HAProxy. See our Cloudflare Web Application Firewall 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.
