We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiADC and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Ease of use in deploying and having it up and running requires minimal knowledge."
"The solution provides high-level services such as availability, redundancy, and load balancing between servers."
"Fortinet FortiADC is a good product because each and every piece of content is monitored by it."
"I like the solution's load balance with DNS intelligence."
"It's a good product because it supports all the features that ADC solutions in the market can support, like F5 solutions, for example, such as the LTM of F5."
"The main feature that we use is GSLB (Global Server Load Balancing). GSLB makes the customer's network more reliable by scaling applications across multiple datacenters. GSLB as a disaster recovery solution can direct traffic based on site availability."
"Key features include SSL Offloading, VM availability, and L7 load balancing."
"The user interface is very easy and integrates with Sandbox easily."
"I like the tool's stability and performance."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is its ease of use."
"The security feature in all the layers of the application is the most valuable."
"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly."
"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable."
"The pricing is quite good."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled."
"The solution's WAF needs an upgrade because it is not as good as FortiWeb, VMware, F5, or Imperva."
"I think it would be helpful if Fortinet put more video examples on their cookbook site."
"Issues with SSL and encrypted traffic."
"The initial setup could be simplified."
"The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced."
"Fortinet FortiADC should include an advanced-level SD-WAN."
"It would be good if they built in a fully functional web application firewall."
"The solution should improve finding false positives and false negatives. There are a lot of false positives."
"It could be more stable, and support could be better. It would also be better if they offered more features. For example, it lacks security features. Before we used another English solution, and we realized that some of the rules were not set up correctly and passed through the Application Gateway's English controllers. But the problem, in this case, is if you send ten rules, for example, six rules hit some issues. IP address blocking could be better. The rules, for example, don't work properly. If you have one issue, one rule or another rule will not work. This sounds like total madness to me."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"The solution has many limitations. You cannot upgrade the VPN to the application gateway. So I started with version one, which has limited capabilities, and they provided version two. And unfortunately, I cannot upgrade from v one to v two like other services. So I have to decommission the version one and create a new one with version two. Also the version one was complex with the certificates uploading the SQL certificates."
"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."
"One of the challenges we faced was the solution does not support any other PCP protocols apart from HTTP and HTTPS."
"The support can be improved when you are configuring the system rules. The Disaster Recovery feature can be added in the next release. The price of the solution can be reduced a bit."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
"The solution doesn’t support wildcard-based and regular expression-based rules."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiADC is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 19 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 4th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 38 reviews. Fortinet FortiADC is rated 7.8, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiADC writes "High-level load balancing and routing protocols but scalability is limited to 200 gigabits". 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". Fortinet FortiADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiWeb, Citrix NetScaler, Kemp LoadMaster and HAProxy, 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 Fortinet FortiADC 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.
