Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Arbor DDoS vs Nexusguard DDoS Protection comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Arbor DDoS
Ranking in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Nexusguard DDoS Protection
Ranking in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection
14th
Average Rating
9.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection category, the mindshare of Arbor DDoS is 15.8%, up from 14.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nexusguard DDoS Protection is 2.5%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection
 

Featured Reviews

Tushar Sail - PeerSpot reviewer
A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks
Arbor DDoS offers security features that automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks. When a DDoS attack is detected targeting a specific IP, the Arbor device immediately becomes in line with the traffic and actively works to prevent the attack. This auto feature is one of the best aspects of Arbor DDoS, as it ensures timely and effective protection against such attacks.
ShashikaKodikara - PeerSpot reviewer
A solution requiring straightforward maintenance while remaining cost-effective compared to its competitors in the market
I am not in a position to speak about the areas where the solution needed improvement because I resigned during the implementation phase. At that time, the implementation was ongoing, and everything seemed to be going well. Using the solution, our team managed to transfer a couple of routers through a few areas. However, I believe the migration is still ongoing. Nonetheless, the first phase of the implementation was successful before my departure. There was a certain level of performance degradation in the solution, which I don't know if it can be tuned. This is because I was working for a short period on the solution. In my experience, it is an area that can be improved while also considering the stability and scalability aspects of the solution. If one wants to scale up, then one needs to change their plan. However, the thing is, one can always go for the larger scale based on one's anticipation of future traffic.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution is easy to use."
"The artificial intelligence feature is most appreciated. This solution can lower the throughput and clear the traffic, which is something really important for us. It also provides good protection. It is user-friendly, and its integration has also been really fast. We have many critical applications, and it was easy to integrate Arbor DDoS with our website, mobile application, and web banking."
"We also use it by serving our customers' cloud signaling services with on-premise APS devices."
"Reporting is quite good. There are several pages of reporting on DDoS attacks, and you can find all the details that you need."
"In the GUI, the packet capture is a very good option, as is the option to block an IP address."
"Arbor has the ability to learn and self-create the appropriate profile for each customer."
"The solution is flexible, easy to implement and has an efficient technical support team."
"It's just one dashboard with mitigation. You decide which mitigation you want and at what threshold to do this or that. Its operation is pretty simple. It's easy."
"Cloud Diversion is another good feature packaged with the whole solution. When attack traffic is detected, Cloud Diversion triggers to automatically route our prefix to Nexusguard’s scrubbing center, ensuring that all attack traffic is dropped in the shortest time possible."
"Filters can be customized depending on the characteristics of the attack traffic. This feature has made it easier for Nexusguard's SOC team to further isolate any specific attack that can't be blocked by pre-configured mitigation."
"The managed service allows us to confidently rely on Nexusguard’s professional team to take relevant actions as and when required to make sure DDoS attacks are successfully mitigated, ensuring 100% uptime of our service."
"Based on the support received for implementation, I rate the solution's technical support a nine out of ten."
"The support team was helpful."
 

Cons

"I think the diversity of protection is extremely limited. It must be expanded in future upgrades and versions."
"An issue which needs to be addressed concerns information I received of attacks on the radar and Arbor, allegedly, not taking any action."
"They should improve the reporting section and make it a little bit more detailed. I would like to have much better and more detailed reports."
"The upgrade process is mildly complex requiring treatment of the custom embedded OS separately from the application. The correlation of the underling OS to the application version can be easily missed."
"The following areas need improvement: opening and tracking support tickets, online support resources, software upgrades/updates and replacement media, and event management guidelines."
"An improvement would be to provide information on how pricing is done on different customer levels."
"I would also like more visibility into their bad actor feeds, their fingerprint feeds. We try to be good stewards of the internet, so if there are attacks, or bad actors within our networks, if there were an easier way for us to find them, we could stop them from doing their malicious activity, and at the same time save money."
"On the application layer, they could have a better distributed traffic flow. They could improve that a bit. For network data it is very effective, but the application layer can be improved."
"One of the features that should be added to the next release is report generation. Currently, reports can be downloaded every month and are only available at the beginning of each month. It would be nice to generate the reports based on specific dates that we prefer and not have to wait until the next month for the current month’s report."
"The solution must provide features for the post-processing of the traffic type and the traffic quality."
"There was a certain level of performance degradation in the solution, which I don't know if it can be tuned...In my experience, it is an area that can be improved while also considering the stability and scalability aspects of the solution."
"One thing that we would like to improve from them is to provide more training to SOC team for them to have a deep understanding of the solution so that they would always be ready to answer anything without the need to escalate queries to senior personnel."
"The mitigation scope of Origin Protection is not fully efficient as there could be delays in activating the countermeasures."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We do not use the Arbor Cloud DDoS solution because it is too costly."
"Pricing is slightly on the higher side."
"Our customers always complain about the price of the product."
"The solution's pricing is based on a licensing model that is expensive when compared to other tools."
"I'm a technical guy. But I know it's expensive compared to its competitors. After you have the on-premise solution, for your solution to be effective you have to subscribe to an "upper level," so there's another cost. There is also a subscription to cloud services, which is another cost."
"I don't deal with the pricing, but it seems that you need to get basic support in order to upgrade the software and implement some patches."
"The price is a little high."
"The price of this solution is a little high in the African market, it should be lower."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one represents a cheap option, and ten represents an expensive option, I would rate the solution a seven in terms of cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Government
6%
Comms Service Provider
23%
Computer Software Company
12%
Media Company
9%
Educational Organization
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which is the best DDoS protection solution for a big ISP for monitoring and mitigating?
I would say if it’s an ISP that will build a scrubbing center, Netscout/Arbor is a good solution. In all other solutions, Imperva is a great choice.
Which is the best DDoS protection solution for a big ISP for monitoring and mitigating?
Arbor would be the best bid, apart from Arbor, Palo Alto and Fortinet have good solutions. As this is an ISP, I would prefer Arbor.
What do you like most about Arbor DDoS?
The quality of the technical support provided by Arbor DDoS is premium.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Nexusguard?
On a scale of one to ten, where one represents a cheap option, and ten represents an expensive option, I would rate the solution a seven in terms of cost. It is worth noting that the solution is no...
What needs improvement with Nexusguard?
The solution must provide features for the post-processing of the traffic type and the traffic quality.
 

Also Known As

Arbor Networks SP, Arbor Networks TMS, Arbor Cloud for ENT
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Xtel Communications
21st Century Technologies, Netpluz, REDtone, SNOC, StarHub, aamra
Find out what your peers are saying about Arbor DDoS vs. Nexusguard DDoS Protection and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.