We performed a comparison between Citrix Web App and API Protection and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We have good customer support."
"The work balancing applications are the most valuable feature."
"I prefer this solution because of its user-friendly interface. I find it simple and close to what I am currently using, which is Citrix Fortiva Access for Multi-Factor Authentication. I appreciate the familiar user interface and troubleshooting tools it offers."
"The web application firewall which protects our services on the internet, and then of course services like our ability to provide high availability for the services we are offering are the most valuable features."
"I like the solution's simplicity compared to Citrix's on-prem solutions."
"The stability is good. If there is a problem, the load will be shifted to other sites automatically, which has been a good experience for us."
"The advantage of Citrix Web App and API Protection is just its graphic user interface for beginners. The solution is nothing special, but we have to use it for the corporation. Another advantage of Citrix Web App and API Protection is that we have our copy to test things and get the know-how of it."
"Citrix is good for application protection."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the web application firewall (WAF)."
"The health probe is pretty good for your backend health. It tells you whether it's communicating and talking to the endpoint correctly. It is quite useful."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"We find it valuable because it is compatible with our existing Azure solution."
"Using policies to link and manage these URL-based routing configurations is also valuable."
"Application Gateway automatically redirects unwanted users and takes care of the security aspect. It also handles the performance side of things, which is why we use it."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway are the policies, the data store they are using, and the cloud platform it operates on."
"We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled."
"The configuration for its web application firewall is complicated."
"The user interface could be more friendly. Some wizards and other documentation for administrators, as well as some use cases, helps us to understand the solution."
"Citrix Web App and API Protection could improve in the area of licensing"
"The product could be improved by making it easier to use and easier to implement."
"The solution's pricing is a big concern and should be improved."
"An area for improvement in Citrix Web App and API Protection is for it to give real-time notifications and alerts. It would be practical if the solution warns you if there's an attack or if the load or traffic volume increases or decreases. An additional feature I'd like to see in Citrix Web App and API Protection is a prediction or artificial intelligence on what is happening, for example, attacks."
"I am not an expert in this solution, but simplicity and user-friendly interfaces are crucial for me. I would appreciate advice from Citrix, particularly in the form of an interactive guide for API protection. It would be helpful if they could provide specific points and recommendations for cybersecurity, indicating areas that need attention or improvement. I find such interactive guidance valuable."
"Their upgrades are not very backward compatible, and sometimes they mess up."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"I want the solution's support to improve. The tool is also expensive."
"The product's performance should be better."
"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."
"I believe that there is room for improvement in terms of additional functionality. It is an advantage to have features readily available for configuration without needing customer-defined rules."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"It does not have the flexibility for using public IPs in version 2."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive."
More Citrix Web App and API Protection Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Citrix Web App and API Protection is ranked 20th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 11 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 3rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 40 reviews. Citrix Web App and API Protection is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Citrix Web App and API Protection writes "Has a good graphic user interface for beginners, but lacks real-time notifications, alerts, and artificial intelligence". 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". Citrix Web App and API Protection is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door, AWS WAF and Akamai App and API Protector, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Citrix Web App and API Protection vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway report.
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.