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

Arbor DDoS vs Sucuri 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
Sucuri
Ranking in Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection
25th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (36th), Domain Name System (DNS) Security (24th)
 

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 Sucuri is 2.0%, up from 1.3% 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%
Sucuri2.0%
Other92.3%
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.
JS
Hardware Engineer at Ministry of Defense
A cost-effective choice for website security and informative support with issues related to CDN quality
One area where they could improve is in providing real-time support options because now you need to open a support ticket and wait for their response. It would greatly benefit customers if they implemented an online chat or messaging system for quicker assistance. I have found their Content Delivery Network service to be lacking in quality, and it could certainly be enhanced to provide better performance. I would also like to see improvements in the deployment process, as it currently takes more time than desirable. Another significant concern is that their service when your website is down, turns it into a static site. This means that if customers try to visit your site during downtime, they will see old content from the static site, which is not ideal. The CDN and tracking services are areas that need improvement, as well as addressing their bandwidth limitations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Mitigating network level volumetric attacks, complete network visibility and complete control on applying countermeasures."
"The product allows us to check real-time progress, including latency and network activities."
"It prevents all unwanted or malicious traffic, using the Threat Intelligence feeds."
"It has an easy-to-understand GUI...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Arbor has a global ranking in reliability and credibility and is very unique in its ability to respond to a very wide scope of threats from its global deployment."
"Arbor's technical support is very good, we've had no issues with it."
"Our customers are very happy when we provide them with the interface... They can check how many attacks they have faced and how many attacks have been blocked."
"The auto-mitigation, that signaling feature, where it automatically raises an alarm that a line is under attack, is important. The upstream service provider will then do something to reduce the load on our internet lines. The fact that it's automated means I don't have to sit and always be looking at threats coming through. It does it almost automatically, without any intervention by me."
"For people who own a personal website, this solution is worth trying out since their security solution is somewhat full-fledged."
"Rather than locate some things manually, the Sucuri plugin scans and allows us to pinpoint whether there is malware or some problem in the site."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"It significantly eases the workload and streamlines the initial setup required to protect a website."
"The initial setup was straightforward. Straight forward because the plugin can simply be installed and then it does its job. It's not complex, there is no learning curve. The online scan is simple, you put in the website address and the scan gives us a report on the browser itself. It's simple to use."
"The most valuable part is the analytics and visualization."
"I use it as a WAF, which is basically a web firewall to monitor and block traffic to our web server."
"Domain name scanning since it allows us to scan all our domain names and determine whether it has malware or if is reported as phishing."
 

Cons

"Based on my experience and feedback from colleagues, Arbor can make better use of the product because you have to spend a lot of time finding information in a huge number of papers."
"The look and feel of the management console is a little old, excessively simple."
"New versions are sometimes released before the bugs are worked out."
"There is definitely room for improvement in third-party intelligence and integrations."
"An improvement would be to provide information on how pricing is done on different customer levels (e.g. is it done per gig or bandwidth?)."
"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."
"The solution could be more granular to include logs per second and enhanced pipeline monitoring for router licenses."
"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."
"Sucuri could provide help for specific security alerts in-line instead of requiring users to search for it in the help section."
"The main improvement I would like to see is support for .NET applications. If they could include this feature, I would include more sites in the protection."
"It would greatly benefit customers if they implemented an online chat or messaging system for quicker assistance."
"In terms of improvement, the cost factor is always there."
"Confident score: Currently it does not have one and there are cases that most websites flagged are false-positives."
"I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. The reason is that we have found sometimes customers or Google saying that there is something wrong with the website but Sucuri says that the site is clean so we do have to look at the site manually which means that the Sucuri scan does not pick up anything and everything."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is a little high."
"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."
"It is an expensive product. I use this product for its different features."
"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."
"The pricing of the solution is cheap."
"Regarding pricing, I would rate it as average. Arbor DDoS offers good value for money with our DDoS filter device. For higher protection needs, Arbor’s CloudMeter’s DDoS mitigation or hardware devices might be more expensive, but customers who need them are usually prepared for the cost and the additional resources required."
"The licensing of a complete Arbor solution, including fire-walling and unified site management, can get expensive."
"Sucuri offers different plans, both the standard plan and an advanced plan. So there are different plans to choose from."
"The ROI has been very good. Because of the solution, I have a tax break. The site developers were not always experienced people. We used to pay more for cleaning up the site when it was infected. Now, we have peace of mind knowing that the solution will clean up the site and that we won't have to go through the unnecessary process of restoring it from a backup. The protection on the WAF and the measures for backups have also prevented our site from going down."
"I’d simply say it’s really worth it."
"It stands out as a more cost-effective option compared to other cloud-based security services like Cloudflare or JetPass."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection solutions are best for your needs.
913,654 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
15%
Construction Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

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
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Xtel Communications
The Loft Salon, Tom McFarlin, WPBeginner, Taylor Town, Everything Everywhere, Financial Ducks in a Row, Chubstr, Real Advice Gal, Sujan Patel, Wallao, List25, School the World
Find out what your peers are saying about Arbor DDoS vs. Sucuri and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,654 professionals have used our research since 2012.