We compared Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Azure Front Door based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Based on user reviews, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is praised for its load balancing capabilities, SSL termination, scalability, and integration with Azure services. Users value its ease of use, customization options, and positive ROI. On the other hand, Azure Front Door is appreciated for traffic management, security measures, scalability, and integration with Azure services. Users highlight its monitoring and analytics capabilities, performance improvement, and overall user experience. Areas for improvement include scalability, performance, user interface, and documentation for Azure Application Gateway, while Azure Front Door could focus on performance, stability, user-friendliness, error handling, customization, and security enhancements.
Features: Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is praised for its excellent load balancing capabilities, efficient SSL termination, and seamless integration. Azure Front Door is highly regarded for its traffic management, advanced security measures, scalability, and high availability. Additionally, it simplifies content delivery and offers robust monitoring and analytics capabilities.
Pricing and ROI: Based on user feedback, the setup cost for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is minimal, while Azure Front Door's setup cost is not explicitly mentioned. The pricing for Application Gateway is considered fair, but there is no information regarding Front Door's pricing., In terms of ROI, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway delivers positive returns with its efficient and reliable performance, cost-effectiveness, scalability, and user-friendly management. On the other hand, Azure Front Door offers a positive ROI through its effective traffic distribution, enhanced website performance, scalability, cost-effectiveness, and seamless integration with other Azure services.
Room for Improvement: Some areas of improvement for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway include enhancing scalability and performance capabilities, improving the user interface and documentation, and providing better support resources. On the other hand, Azure Front Door could benefit from enhancing performance and stability, refining the configuration process to be more user-friendly, improving error handling and troubleshooting capabilities, increasing customization options, and addressing security concerns.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews for Microsoft Azure Application Gateway highlight varying durations for deployment and setup, ranging from a week to three months. On the other hand, Azure Front Door also has mixed feedback, with some users taking a week for both deployment and setup, and others requiring three months and a week., Users have praised the customer service and support provided by both Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Azure Front Door. Azure Application Gateway's support is described as top-notch, reliable, and efficient. Azure Front Door's support team is commended for their prompt response and willingness to address queries.
The summary above is based on 26 interviews we conducted recently with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Azure Front Door users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Has a great application firewall and we like the security."
"The most valuable feature is that you can implement resources globally. It does not depend on location and ability or something like that. This is to connect clients around the world."
"The web application firewall is a great feature."
"I am impressed with the tool's integrations."
"The price is one of the most important aspects of the product. It's quite affordable."
"The solution is good."
"Rules Engine is a valuable feature."
"It inspects the traffic at the network level before it comes into Azure. We can do SSL offloading, and it can detect abnormalities before the traffic comes into the application. It can be used globally and is easy to set up. It is also quite stable and scalable."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"The solution provides great automation and it is easy to upgrade service."
"It is a scalable solution...The installation phase of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is very easy."
"The security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"The most valuable feature is WAF."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is its ease of use."
"The product's features are limited compared to Cloudflare. The tool also doesn't work well in a hybrid environment. I would like to see a way to add personalized APIs in the system."
"The product needs to improve its latency."
"The user interface needs improvement as it is difficult to create the mapping to link the problem with your private address sources."
"This is a relatively expensive solution."
"My suggestion for improvement would be to enhance the Data Export feature to include specific tables, particularly the Azure Diagnostics table."
"It lacks sufficient functionality."
"There's a limitation on the amount of global rules we can add."
"There is room for improvement and they're working on it."
"The tool is a pain to deal with when it comes to the area of configuration."
"The graphical interface needs improvement because it is not user friendly."
"In the next release, the solution could improve the integration with Service Mesh and other Azure Security Services."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"The pricing of the solution is a bit high. The solution should offer different pricing systems."
"The working speed of the solution needs improvement."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway could improve by allowing features to use more third-party tools."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Front Door is ranked 9th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 reviews. Azure Front Door is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Azure Front Door writes " An easy -to-setup stable solution that enables implementing resources globally and has a good technical support team". 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". Azure Front Door is most compared with Amazon CloudFront, Cloudflare, Akamai, AWS Global Accelerator and Azure Firewall, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, AWS WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and HAProxy. See our Azure Front Door 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.