

AWS WAF and Azure Web Application Firewall are competitive solutions in web application security. AWS WAF seems to have the upper hand due to its pay-as-you-go model and customizable rule sets that offer excellent flexibility in handling varying traffic loads.
Features: AWS WAF offers flexible on-demand features, highly configurable rules, and strong integration with AWS services, providing rapid rule implementation and excellent security against common vulnerabilities. Azure WAF, with its robust integration within Microsoft's ecosystem, simplifies setup and configuration, providing excellent OWASP threat protection and seamless functionality with Azure services.
Room for Improvement: AWS WAF could improve automated threat detection and reporting capabilities as well as provide more intuitive billing and easier rule configuration. Azure WAF would benefit from streamlined logging and improved documentation. Both could enhance automated threat measures, with AWS needing more detailed resource usage visibility and Azure requiring a clearer pricing model.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: AWS WAF is simple to deploy and integrates well with AWS, though technical support feedback is mixed. Azure WAF is praised for easy configuration within Azure, with generally well-received technical support, although documentation could be clearer. AWS provides public cloud deployment flexibility, while Azure excels in seamless Azure ecosystem setup.
Pricing and ROI: AWS WAF's pricing is deemed reasonable with its pay-as-you-go model, offering cost-effectiveness and flexibility. Azure WAF's pricing is fair, though some view it as high relative to features offered. Both products demonstrate strong ROI, enhancing security infrastructure, with AWS offering more predictable and flexible pricing.
With AWS WAF, it is easier for us to block unwanted malicious DDoS attacks and threats from coming into our web application.
Recently, they have been under serious attack with major exploits, such as Log4j, affecting Fortinet and Palo Alto, and even Cisco and VMware.
AI-based recommendations save on time and money.
Resolving issues can take time because the support personnel may lack product expertise, leading to delays.
They reach out when you send them a ticket, and within 24 hours or less, someone is able to get back to you to solve your problem.
They are good at troubleshooting and configuring things.
I am very satisfied with the response from Microsoft dedicated architects if it happens that I have to call for their support.
I reached out to their support, and they helped me resolve the issue effectively.
AWS WAF does scale in the sense that it is fully managed and has automatic scaling.
Some Azure applications, like the web application firewall, require a certain level of SKU for hosting setup.
For our company, Azure Web Application Firewall works effectively for scalability.
Since it protects web applications from common attacks such as SQL injection and XSS, it is very stable.
In terms of reliability, I would rate AWS WAF about six out of ten due to the need for improved signature sets.
We faced issues with AWS WAF when writing the custom rules.
Very rarely do I see any latency issues.
Compared to firewalls, WAFs generally provide limited stateful analysis capabilities.
The way we see it now is just mentioned as a percentage from bots and actual users, which should include proper graphs and detailed information.
Features like bot protection or DDoS mitigation, available with other WAF vendors, do not come natively with AWS WAF.
Upgrading the platform regularly is necessary for security, however, frequent updates every six months or year from Azure can be a maintenance overhead.
The pricing needs improvement, and I think for beginners it will be a little bit complicated, so the ease of use could be enhanced.
Due to our status as an AWS shop, AWS WAF is cost-effective for us, and we benefit from discounts due to our extensive use of AWS services.
The licensing cost for AWS WAF is just pay-as-you-go; it is a service-based model.
It is even a lower cost compared to AWS and GCP.
Sometimes, when opting for a higher SKU, it's not the WAF itself that's costly but the additional requirements.
I would place Azure Web Application Firewall at an eight on a scale from one to 10, with one being cheap and 10 being expensive.
The biggest benefit of AWS WAF for us is to filter malicious requests, so we can protect our environment and application from malicious actors.
It has also helped to improve the posture of our application, prevent all DDoS attacks, and unnecessary traffic and SQL injection that is reducing the performance of our application.
The cloud-native nature of AWS is crucial since most of our workload is in AWS, making AWS WAF native to Amazon Web Services.
With Microsoft, everything is within a single suite, making it easier to configure and plan.
It is almost impossible to access these assets from outside, requiring a very skilled attacker to obtain asset tokens of a customer using Azure.
It integrates effectively with things such as Sentinel and Defender for Cloud, so mostly it's the analytics and now the AI capabilities that have been introduced with Co-pilot.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| AWS WAF | 5.8% |
| Azure Web Application Firewall | 3.1% |
| Other | 91.1% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 22 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 26 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 6 |
| Large Enterprise | 12 |
AWS Web Application Firewall (WAF) is a firewall security system that monitors incoming and outgoing traffic for applications and websites based on your pre-defined web security rules. AWS WAF defends applications and websites from common Web attacks that could otherwise damage application performance and availability and compromise security.
You can create rules in AWS WAF that can include blocking specific HTTP headers, IP addresses, and URI strings. These rules prevent common web exploits, such as SQL injection or cross-site scripting. Once defined, new rules are deployed within seconds, and can easily be tracked so you can monitor their effectiveness via real-time insights. These saved metrics include URIs, IP addresses, and geo locations for each request.
AWS WAF Features
Some of the solution's top features include:
Reviews from Real Users
AWS WAF stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Two major ones are its user-friendly interface and its integration capabilities.
Kavin K., a security analyst at M2P Fintech, writes, “I believe the most impressive features are integration and ease of use. The best part of AWS WAF is the cloud-native WAF integration. There aren't any hidden deployments or hidden infrastructure which we have to maintain to have AWS WAF. AWS maintains everything; all we have to do is click the button, and WAF will be activated. Any packet coming through the internet will be filtered through.”
Azure Web Application Firewall (WAF) provides centralized protection of your web applications from common exploits and vulnerabilities. Web applications are increasingly targeted by malicious attacks that exploit commonly known vulnerabilities. SQL injection and cross-site scripting are among the most common attacks.
To learn more about our solution, ask questions, and share feedback, join our Microsoft Security, Compliance and Identity Community.
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.