No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Arbor DDoS vs Nexusguard DDoS Protection comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 5, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Arbor DDoS
Ranking in Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Nexusguard DDoS Protection
Ranking in Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection
24th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection category, the mindshare of Arbor DDoS is 5.7%, down from 11.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nexusguard DDoS Protection is 2.1%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Arbor DDoS5.7%
Nexusguard DDoS Protection2.1%
Other92.2%
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1331304 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director Of Research And Development at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
Automated threat intelligence and flow-based mitigation have improved our DDoS defense
A very useful feature in Arbor DDoS is its ability to send flow spec announcements to routers. For example, if it is clear that a Layer 3 or Layer 4 attack is occurring and the attack pattern is identified through source and destination IP addresses and ports, you can generate flow spec filters. These filters are transferred through BGP to border routers, which automatically build filters, mitigating the attack even at the network's boundary and preventing it from reaching the TMS. This allows the TMS to focus on other tasks. This is a highly effective feature that can mitigate huge volumetric attacks; for example, we experienced a 32-gigabit attack, and all those 32 gigabits were dropped by our border routers, not by Arbor DDoS itself. The flow spec announcement was generated by Arbor DDoS, and as far as I know, the same technology is used by Radware, but it comes under a different feature and a different license. At the time, we were told that flow spec mitigation was an additional very expensive license to purchase from Radware, while Radware included everything in one package.
ShashikaKodikara - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Cybersecurity at Technovage Solution
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

"Arbor is very good at what it does."
"The solution looks into volumetric attacks and gets them resolved."
"The analytics part of Arbor DDoS is great, and we are satisfied with the reporting and analytics part, especially the new version."
"Arbor DDoS is easy to use, provides effective blocking of DDoS attacks, and can be used for DNS, web, and main servers. Additionally, this solution is far easier to operate than others solutions, such as Fortinet DDoS."
"The solution is flexible, easy to implement and has an efficient technical support team."
"It's very user-friendly."
"The Arbor Networks SP device provided great visualization of the network traffic."
"We have taken on the Arbor Cloud subscription, which is really useful because you secure yourself for anything beyond your current mitigation capacity. This is a really good feature of Arbor that is available."
"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 support team was helpful."
"Nexusguard has given us confidence that we are protected against any outside attacks."
"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."
"Nexusguard has exponentially improved the availability of our services because we don't have to worry much about any threats or DDoS attacks towards our services."
"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."
 

Cons

"Sometimes it is not able to filter traffic adequately because of the hybrid approach."
"It could include a lot of enhancements related to AI and automation."
"The solution's shortcomings are related to its documentation, so it's an area that needs to improve."
"Arbor Pravail APS devices do not sync features or config the backup enough. This needs to be improved."
"An issue which needs to be addressed concerns information I received of attacks on the radar and Arbor, allegedly, not taking any action."
"We need a SaaS model for the solution."
"I think Arbor DDoS needs improvement in areas where competitors like S5, Redver, or NETSCOUT offer web application firewall functionality or dedicated web application firewall devices. Arbor lacks these features, which is a significant disadvantage. Yes, I would like to see these features introduced in Arbor as well. Regarding real-time detection capabilities, Arbor DDoS works very well. We and our customers are very satisfied with its performance. However, it would benefit from adding Web Application Firewall (WAF) capabilities to reach a larger customer base."
"There is definitely room for improvement in third-party intelligence and integrations."
"The solution must provide features for the post-processing of the traffic type and the traffic quality."
"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."
"One of the features that should be added to the next release is report generation."
"The mitigation scope of Origin Protection is not fully efficient as there could be delays in activating the countermeasures."
"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 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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is a bit costly if you're a small organization, but I think it's worth the price that they are charging."
"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 know about the pricing details as our company's service provider offers us the solution as an inbuilt feature within the internet bandwidth they provide us."
"We do not use the Arbor Cloud DDoS solution because it is too costly."
"Arbor DDoS is quite expensive, but all these solutions are expensive because they deal with confidential information."
"It is an expensive product. I use this product for its different features."
"The solution's pricing is based on a licensing model that is expensive when compared to other tools."
"The licensing of a complete Arbor solution, including fire-walling and unified site management, can get expensive."
"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.
912,818 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
46%
Media Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise29
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Arbor DDoS?
The prices for Arbor DDoS are expensive. The licensing is subscription-based. From our sales department, they discuss that prices are very high.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

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: September 2026.
912,818 professionals have used our research since 2012.