Citrix Web App and API Protection vs Microsoft Azure Application Gateway comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

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.
To learn more, read our detailed Citrix Web App and API Protection vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Report (Updated: March 2024).
767,995 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"I like the solution's simplicity compared to Citrix's on-prem solutions.""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.""The stability is good. If there is a problem, the load will be shifted to other sites automatically, which has been a good experience for us.""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.""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.""The solution's technical support is good.""Citrix Web App API Protection allows you to enable a blocking mode"

More Citrix Web App and API Protection Pros →

"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable.""Good customization; able to report and take action on alerts.""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.""It does an excellent job of load balancing.""I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks.""The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use.""The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs.""The most valuable feature is WAF."

More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pros →

Cons
"The reporting is not so good. They don't have an application to connect the logs.""Their upgrades are not very backward compatible, and sometimes they mess up.""The product could be improved by making it easier to use and easier to implement.""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.""Security could be improved because then I can get rid of my Cisco firewalls. If they improve the security then I could run my security, my proxy, my firewalling and my SDN solution on one device instead of having to have multiple devices.""Citrix Web App and API Protection could improve in the area of licensing""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."

More Citrix Web App and API Protection Cons →

"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM.""Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port.""There is room for improvement in the pricing model.""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.""For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved.""Scalability can be an issue.""Microsoft Azure Application Gateway could improve by allowing features to use more third-party tools.""The solution is easy to use overall, but the dashboard could be updated with a better layout and graphical design so that we can see the data a bit easier. Microsoft could also add more documentation. The documentation Microsoft provides doesn't tell us about resource requirements. We found that the instances we had weren't sufficient to support the firewall, so we had to increase them."

More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "We have all the features and functions of Citrix because we have a premium license."
  • "For partners, NetScaler is not as expensive price-wise versus F5."
  • "Citrix Web App and API Protection are in the middle when we talk about pricing and licensing"
  • "The pricing for Citrix Web App and API Protection is unreasonable. I don't know the exact price, but I heard it's tens of thousands and it's a bit too much for the small country I live in."
  • "The solution is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
  • "On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight or nine out of ten."
  • "I rate the pricing an eight out of ten since it is expensive."
  • "In Turkey, everything is good, but it seems expensive for us due to the currency exchange. I don't have a specific rating scale, but if I had to rate the price, I would say it's around a six out of ten."
  • More Citrix Web App and API Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It is not expensive."
  • "Every solution comes with a license and cost. Microsoft provides the license and the total cost is for the maintenance every year."
  • "Between v1 and v2, there is a lot of change in the pricing. It is very costly compared to AWS."
  • "There is some additional cost, such as extended support."
  • "The cost is not an issue."
  • "The solution is reasonably priced compared to other solutions."
  • "The pricing is based on how much you use the solution."
  • "The solution is paid monthly. The solution is highly expensive."
  • More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
    767,995 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:In Turkey, everything is good, but it seems expensive for us due to the currency exchange. I don't have a specific rating scale, but if I had to rate the price, I would say it's around a six out of… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:We found Azure Front Door to be easily scaled and very stable. The implementation is very fast and Microsoft provides excellent support. Azure Front Door can quickly detect abnormalities before the… more »
    Top Answer:Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit for… more »
    Top Answer:I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 1000 users who use it daily.
    Ranking
    Views
    1,500
    Comparisons
    914
    Reviews
    6
    Average Words per Review
    430
    Rating
    7.3
    Views
    14,932
    Comparisons
    12,739
    Reviews
    23
    Average Words per Review
    363
    Rating
    7.3
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Citrix NetScaler AppFirewall , Citrix Web App Firewall
    Azure Application Gateway, MS Azure Application Gateway
    Learn More
    Overview

    Citrix Web App Firewall is a web application firewall (WAF) that protects web applications and sites from both known and unknown attacks, including application-layer and zero-day threats. Despite an ever-evolving threat landscape, Citrix Web App Firewall delivers comprehensive protection without degrading throughput or application response times. Available as a cloud solution or integrated within the Citrix ADC platform, simplified configuration controls further mitigate risk. Our pooled licensing options allow you to grow incrementally and scale on demand.

    Azure Application Gateway is a web traffic load balancer that enables you to manage traffic to your web applications. Traditional load balancers operate at the transport layer (OSI layer 4 - TCP and UDP) and route traffic based on source IP address and port, to a destination IP address and port.

    To learn more about our solution, ask questions, and share feedback, join our Microsoft Security, Compliance and Identity Community.

    Sample Customers
    NSS Labs, ICSA Labs
    Lilly, AccuWeather, AIRFRANCE, Honeywell
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization57%
    Computer Software Company9%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Government4%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company28%
    Comms Service Provider20%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Government7%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business36%
    Large Enterprise64%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business9%
    Midsize Enterprise62%
    Large Enterprise29%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business40%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise64%
    Buyer's Guide
    Citrix Web App and API Protection vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix Web App and API Protection vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    767,995 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Citrix Web App and API Protection is ranked 20th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 38 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, Azure Front Door, Fortinet FortiWeb, AWS WAF and Akamai App and API Protector, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, AWS WAF 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.