We performed a comparison between Comodo cWatch and StackPath WAF 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."
"The product’s most valuable is WAF. The authentication feature helps us protect WordPress sites."
"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."
"The product’s performance for caching feature needs improvement."
Earn 20 points
Comodo cWatch is ranked 35th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) while StackPath WAF is ranked 27th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 1 review. Comodo cWatch is rated 9.6, while StackPath WAF is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Comodo cWatch writes "Excellent security, good encryption, and pretty stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of StackPath WAF writes "Stable product with an easy setup process ". Comodo cWatch is most compared with Cloudflare, Atomic ModSecurity Rules, Sucuri and AWS WAF, whereas StackPath WAF is most compared with Sucuri and AWS WAF.
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.
