We performed a comparison between Comodo cWatch and Fortinet FortiWeb based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
"The FIM feature, the information in the new management system, and their support are the most valuable features. The scanned results are quite fast as compared to other platforms compared to scanning timing. It takes about a minute or two minutes. Also, the results of the Comodo scan results are in detail."
"When it comes to blocking unknown threats and attacks, I would give it the highest score possible. We first started using AWS and its Web Application Firewalls. That was okay, but it was quite a manual process to keep it up to date, whereas Fortinet is always up to date, and the default rules or the modules that you can turn on are very easy to use."
"High-performance and detection engines, provide a high rate of exposure of web attacks."
"When we had Cisco we had around thirty thousand entries on our firewalls. Now we are down to three thousand. Fortinet has a mechanism to detect all of your entries which are not used, and it can clean it up."
"L-7 protection makes possible to protect legacy/not up-to-date servers/applications without changing the application code."
"The solution is stable."
"FortiWeb offers a good price for the marketplace. In the Sri Lankan market, it's hard to find high-end products that can match FortiWeb's pricing. For high-end solutions, the price is always extremely high."
"Technical support is very good."
"The valuable feature of Fortinet FortiWeb vulnerability scanner"
"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"We would like the interface to be easier to use and more user-friendly. The interface needs to be enhanced."
"The solution is not very scalable, to scale up would require another deployment with a new appliance and a change to the network."
"F5 and some other firewalls are easier to customize. FortiWeb could be more flexible and customizable. The documentation could also be improved because many of the advanced features aren't fully documented."
"New releases and old releases have some bugs, some features do not work as good as we want but every new release the Fortinet team fixes up problems."
"The product’s stability could be improved."
"The initial setup in our data center was somewhat complex."
"We have had problems with deployments where we've had to contact technical support to resolve them."
"They can introduce a scaled-down version for the SMB market. It would be very competitive in the environment."
Earn 20 points
Comodo cWatch is ranked 35th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) while Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 83 reviews. Comodo cWatch is rated 9.6, while Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Comodo cWatch writes "Excellent security, good encryption, and pretty stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "Cost-effective, easy to configure, and works very well as a single solution for multiple environments". Comodo cWatch is most compared with Cloudflare, Atomic ModSecurity Rules, Sucuri and AWS WAF, whereas Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, AWS WAF, Azure Web Application Firewall and Imperva Web Application Firewall.
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.