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

Azure Web Application Firewall vs Comodo cWatch comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure Web Application Firewall
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (18th)
Comodo cWatch
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
25th
Average Rating
9.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
CDN (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2024, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Azure Web Application Firewall is 5.3%, up from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Comodo cWatch is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Audrien Manfo - PeerSpot reviewer
Jun 28, 2024
Good features and protects well against DDoS attacks but needs a bigger knowledge base
We primarily use the solution for cloud security The solution has been very good at helping us avoid DDoS attacks.  The solution is very good. It has a lot of useful features. It's great for protecting against DDoS attacks.  Its security control is very good.  The knowledge base could be…
Bernardo Murillo - PeerSpot reviewer
May 24, 2024
Alerts organizations if any malware is detected and removes it quickly
I use the solution to detect vulnerabilities in the site The solution allows me to change my logo. It gives me a white-label portal because I am a partner. OWASP has been the most effective in malware prevention. It can detect if the headers are okay and do FTP scans. We get alerts if we have…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The integration it has with GitHub is great."
"It has been a stable product in my experience."
"It's great for protecting against DDoS attacks."
"It's a good option if you want a solution that's ready to go and easy for your team to learn. It's cloud-based, so you don't need to buy or maintain any hardware infrastructure."
"Azure WAF is extremely stable."
"The solution has good dashboards."
"We have found the most valuable features to be the web application, minimal skills required for management, control through policies, and automation."
"The initial setup is easy and straightforward...Azure Web Application Firewall is a scalable product."
"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
"We get alerts if we have some malware."
"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."
 

Cons

"The documentation needs to be improved."
"Azure WAF should not be deployed in the middle of the traffic."
"From a reporting perspective, they could do more there."
"The knowledge base could be improved."
"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."
"The management can be improved."
"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."
"There is a need to be able to configure the solution more."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
"The portal is a little slow."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Azure WAF has price advantages over other WAF solutions. The pricing model is flexible because you pay on a scale based on the level of protection you need."
"The price of the solution depends on your architecture and how you manage it. You can control the cost in Azure quite well. The costs do not directly correlate to expenses in the features we are using."
"I give the pricing a nine out of ten."
"The price is for this solution is fair and there is a license needed."
"The price is reasonable. It is approximately $2,000 US per month."
"We have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft and the pricing is good."
"Comodo cWatch’s first level, which has fewer features, costs $7."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
805,335 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Wholesaler/Distributor
13%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Azure Web Application Firewall?
The knowledge base could be improved. They should make it so that, if anyone wants to jump into cloud security management on Axure, they can easily start. It's important that they make the technolo...
What needs improvement with Comodo cWatch?
The portal is a little slow. I have to wait for it to load all the information. CDN's performance must be improved.
What is your primary use case for Comodo cWatch?
I use the solution to detect vulnerabilities in the site.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Comodo cWatch?
Comodo cWatch’s price is very good compared to Cloudflare’s. The first level of Cloudflare costs us about $20. The next level costs $100. Comodo cWatch’s first level, which has fewer features, cost...
 

Also Known As

No data available
cWatch
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Xerox, Intel, HP, UPS, Western Union, Western Digital
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Web Application Firewall vs. Comodo cWatch and other solutions. Updated: September 2024.
805,335 professionals have used our research since 2012.