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

Arbor DDoS vs Corero 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
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Corero
Ranking in Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection
22nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection category, the mindshare of Arbor DDoS is 5.5%, down from 11.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Corero is 2.5%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Arbor DDoS5.5%
Corero2.5%
Other92.0%
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.
HP
Presale Manager at HTech Vietnam
Effective network and DDoS protection with suitable pricing
I use Corero for network DDoS protection projects. It is particularly effective in providing protection against network DDoS attacks I find Corero to be good, especially in a wide area. It does not have application filtering or application DDoS prevention, but for network DDoS projects, it is…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Reporting is quite good. There are several pages of reporting on DDoS attacks, and you can find all the details that you need."
"Go for it."
"The solution is really stable and is the most stable device in our topology."
"The feature I find most valuable is the packet capture, which beautifully shows the communication between the client and the server, identifying potential malicious activity."
"When there was an attack, the attack was contained only on the IPs under attack, the rest of the network was not impacted, and that is the most important part."
"Arbor's technical support is very good, we've had no issues with it."
"With real-time packet capture features, you can easily and quickly response."
"It is an agnostic and transparent inline platform, which means that the maximum visibility of the symmetric and asymmetric traffic is available, even allowing bidirectional detection of the attack."
"It is a very efficient and robust appliance."
"The most valuable feature of Corero is its ability to handle smaller attacks in terms of the amount of volume and time. You can handle almost 100 perfect of the attacks locally."
"SmartWall devices occupy only one-fourth of the width of a rack unit, making them very easy to install."
"The DDoS protection features are valuable."
"This is a hybrid solution."
"I like the fact that the product provides a hybrid solution."
"The most important aspect, in general, is that the price is suitable for most clients."
 

Cons

"New versions are sometimes released before the bugs are worked out."
"There is always room for improvement for any product or service. If we can bring in more agility when deploying services, that is definitely a scope which we can work towards. Nowadays, everything is being offered as a service model. It is not that we have to deploy the physical hardware, many things move up to the cloud, or even can be delivered in the VNS form in the customer's environment as well. So, in that space, if we can add more features to make it more seamless for customers to use and make it available through some marketplace, not only at the hyperscalers, but also for any on-prem deployment, that definitely would be a big plus."
"Because we had some routers that were somewhat old, they were not integrated with Arbor. They did not support the NetFlow version that Arbor was running. That was a challenge. We had to upgrade the routers. Some backward-compatibility would be helpful."
"I think the diversity of protection is extremely limited. It must be expanded in future upgrades and versions."
"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."
"We need a SaaS model for the solution."
"The look and feel of the management console is a little old, excessively simple. If you compare it with other solutions, the look and feel of the console is like you're using technology from five or six years ago. It doesn't show all the technology that is actually behind it. It looks like an older solution, even though it is not."
"It could include a lot of enhancements related to AI and automation."
"Lacks international presence."
"Corero needs to improve its application DDoS prevention capabilities and user behavior detection features."
"It could use support in Spanish."
"Juniper is known in our country, but it is not very popular. There is also not enough information about Corero. Our enterprise and financial sectors don't know about this solution. They need to provide more information and do more marketing for this solution in our country."
"The approach taken by Corero is to partner with other organizations in order to address volumetric attacks that cannot be handled by the hardware installed in the infrastructure. Corero does not have a solution for these attacks, so they are looking for partners to help them manage them. This approach is supplemented by local hardware, but the main focus is on the partnerships. It would be beneficial to have a more complete solution."
"The product must provide more Layer 7 capabilities."
"I'd like to see an increase in Corero's international team. Our clients are generally companies with an international presence and Corero is not represented in all the countries where our clients have presence."
"Juniper is known in our country, but it is not very popular."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As far as I know, they are the best in this sector, in DDoS protection. They know it, I know, because their service prices are too high. They provide cloud DDoS protection for ISPs, but that is also too expensive."
"Arbor DDoS is quite expensive, but all these solutions are expensive because they deal with confidential information."
"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."
"There is room for improvement with the pricing. It is an expensive solution. The issue with the pricing is more the way it is built. Right now we're paying per router, and there's a limitation there. I would like to see bundle-pricing where there is an overall solution cost."
"We do not use the Arbor Cloud DDoS solution because it is too costly."
"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."
"It is an expensive product. I use this product for its different features."
"The price is a little high."
"Its price is normal."
"The price of Corero is affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection solutions are best for your needs.
915,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
14%
University
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise29
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

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.
What needs improvement with Corero?
Corero needs to improve its application DDoS prevention capabilities and user behavior detection features.
What is your primary use case for Corero?
I use Corero for network DDoS protection projects. It is particularly effective in providing protection against network DDoS attacks.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Corero?
The pricing of Corero is reasonable and suitable for most clients. However, I am not sure about the approximate licensing costs.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Xtel Communications
Telesystem, Jagex, Hivelocity, Los Angeles Dedicated, Netrics hosting, Hyve, Zacks Investment Research, Dynamic Business Systems, G4BOX INC., GamersFirst, Fastmetrics, San Miguel County
Find out what your peers are saying about Arbor DDoS vs. Corero and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.