We performed a comparison between Citrix ADC vs Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Users give a similar rating to both solutions. Each solution has an easy deployment, similar opinions on pricing, and good technical support. However, they differ in their strengths and weaknesses in terms of features.
"The most valuable features are the VDA Delivery, Gateway Fort, and the load balancing."
"My clients use it for load balancing."
"I like the ease of use. It's easy to manage. I also like it's ease of use with virtualization technologies with applications."
"The most valuable feature is the content switching."
"Global load balancing between data centers."
"We use the solution's IP Reputation and bot protection features."
"Citrix Director has been great. It gives us one pane of glass to be able to monitor what's going on with the user sessions as well as to keep on top of the virtual desktops, any servers that may be offline or behaving suspiciously, or any troublesome spots like disconnections. We also use Citrix Studio for maintaining the actual servers that are hosting these applications. We use it for delivery groups in case we need to modify delivery groups in regards to which groups have access to which applications. It has been very helpful."
"The load balancing feature of this solution is very good."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution...The installation phase of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is very easy."
"The solution provides great automation and it is easy to upgrade service."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 1000 users who use it daily."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway are the policies, the data store they are using, and the cloud platform it operates on."
"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."
"We face challenges with the solution's firmware upgrades frequently."
"Currently, it is not easy to use the configuration capabilities of the product."
"Too many bugs in the software and it's always difficult when you need to update."
"If one device or switch fails, the failover to another device is not seamless which is painful."
"Needs configuration processes like disabling LB VIPs, automatically disabling the IPs used."
"I think the documentation should be improved."
"Technical support could be improved."
"Technical support sometimes takes a little longer because of the multilevel ticket priority."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway could improve by allowing features to use more third-party tools."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive."
"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."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
"The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's first deployment is complex. It needs to improve its pricing."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Citrix NetScaler is ranked 2nd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 85 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 4th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews. Citrix NetScaler is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Citrix NetScaler writes "Optimizing application delivery and ensuring robust network performance with its excellent stability and comprehensive load-balancing capabilities". 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 NetScaler is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiADC, HAProxy, Loadbalancer.org and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, AWS WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Azure Front Door and HAProxy. See our Citrix NetScaler 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.