Azure Web Application Firewall vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) comparison

Microsoft and Fastly are both solutions in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category. Microsoft is ranked #12 with an average rating of 8.3, while Fastly is ranked #25 with an average rating of 8.0. Microsoft holds a 3.0% mindshare in WAF, compared to Fastly’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 60% of Fastly users who would recommend it.

Azure Web Application Firewall

Read 16 Azure Web Application Firewall reviews

3,060 Views
2,448 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (po...

Read 4 The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) reviews

992 Views
873 Comparison Views

60% willing to recommend

Azure Web Application Firewall

The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (po...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 1, 2025

Fastly Next-Gen WAF and Azure Web Application Firewall compete in addressing web application security vulnerabilities. Fastly Next-Gen WAF shows an advantage in agility and analytics, while Azure Web Application Firewall excels in Microsoft's ecosystem integration.

Features: Fastly Next-Gen WAF provides real-time threat detection, blocking mechanisms, and customizable settings. Azure Web Application Firewall offers comprehensive integration, extensive security management features, and compatibility within Microsoft’s cloud platforms.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Fastly Next-Gen WAF is praised for its quick and flexible setup, easily adapting to various environments. Azure Web Application Firewall offers seamless integration within Azure but may be less flexible for non-Azure users. Azure’s customer support is more structured, especially for existing Azure customers.

Pricing and ROI: Fastly Next-Gen WAF is cost-effective, providing quick ROI for those requiring agile solutions. Azure Web Application Firewall demands a substantial initial investment, targeting enterprises seeking extensive integration and justifying costs with long-term value from Microsoft services.

To learn more, read our detailed Azure Web Application Firewall vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Azure Web Application Firewall vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,757 peers since 2012

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

Azure Web Application Firewall

Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)

12th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Microsoft Security Suite (21st)

The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (po...

Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)

25th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

4.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Azure Web Application Firewall is 3.0%, down from 4.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) is 1.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Web Application Firewall (WAF) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Azure Web Application Firewall	3.0%
The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)	1.2%
Other	95.8%

Web Application Firewall (WAF)

Featured Reviews

Kevin Rua Jefwa

Global IT Solutions Specialist at RELIEF INTERNATIONAL INC

Offers robust analytics and seamless cloud integration with minor room for user interface improvement

The Microsoft support and the analytics are what I appreciate about Azure Web Application Firewall. 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. It helps when looking for threats. It reduces issues significantly because the filtering capabilities are high. Given that it's a cloud solution, we have very minimal downtime, especially because we have Microsoft support. On a scale of one to 10, I would give it an eight.

Read full review

reviewer2161107

Staff Engineer at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees

Room for improvement with user interface while competitive pricing impresses

It is managed through Infrastructure as Code, so all configurations can be managed in the code itself, which is beneficial. Because it uses rules, it is easy to set up, and we have many different sites where the configurations are straightforward. Though the UI is not very interactive, which is a downside, we can manage many things. The UI is not very intuitive and could be better. However, we manage all the configurations through code, which is easy to maintain. It has extensive anomaly detection capabilities, so the traffic is classified into several categories where thresholds can be defined and customized based on false positives and false negatives. This is advantageous because you do not need to tweak it very often. Once you set it up, an audit once a quarter would suffice. Because The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) is API-driven, we have integrations with the CI/CD pipeline through GitHub Actions, making it easy to integrate.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's great for protecting against DDoS attacks."

"The most valuable feature of Azure Web Application Firewall is its ability to filter requests and block false positives by using custom rules and the OWASP rule set."

"The Microsoft support and the analytics are what I appreciate about Azure Web Application Firewall; 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."

"It is almost impossible to access these assets from outside, requiring a very skilled attacker to obtain asset tokens of a customer using Azure."

"The solution has good dashboards."

"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."

"I can only strongly recommend using the Azure Web Application Firewall."

"Configuration is much easier than using different platforms."

More Azure Web Application Firewall pros

"Fastly (Signal Sciences) integrates and tags the intermittent traffic based on patterns. It generates signals and provides them in a dashboard where we can view them and decide whether to allow or deny traffic. It's a more advanced and easy-to-navigate dashboard."

"The product's most valuable feature is its ability to set up the rules easily."

"Because The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) is API-driven, we have integrations with the CI/CD pipeline through GitHub Actions, making it easy to integrate."

"When configuring a web application firewall using Signal Sciences, we configure a rule whereby no one except a few people can access the application."

Cons

"The documentation needs to be improved."

"Some Azure applications, like the web application firewall, require a certain level of SKU for hosting setup. The basic setup does not allow me to use the web application firewall and other additional services."

"The support for proxy forwarding could improve."

"Deployment should be simplified so that a non-techie can handle it."

"I encountered difficulties with certificates for a Linux server when implementing protection. I had to create the entire chain, as I couldn't simply upload the certificate and the chain."

"From a reporting perspective, they could do more there."

"We would like to see additional site services using AI to provide information about blocking requests and offer analytics on the origin of calls."

"The pricing needs improvement, and I think for beginners it will be a little bit complicated, so the ease of use could be enhanced."

More Azure Web Application Firewall cons

"Fastly don't support caching for China users. That's the only feature lacking compared to Akamai."

"The areas that could be improved in Signal Sciences include the effectiveness of rules, as many didn't function optimally and required custom rule-writing to address bypasses for WAF."

"The UI is not very intuitive and could be better."

"Even if we create some custom rules, Signal Sciences cannot capture some of the malicious traffic."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I give the pricing a nine out of ten."

"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."

"The price is for this solution is fair and there is a license needed."

"We have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft and the pricing is good."

"The price is reasonable. It is approximately $2,000 US per month."

"The product has an affordable cost."

"The pricing is 50% less than Akamai."

"Signal Sciences is pretty cheap compared to other solutions."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Manufacturing Company

13%

Retailer

11%

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Large Enterprise	12

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Web Application Firewall?

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.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Azure Web Application Firewall?

The pricing needs improvement, and I think for beginners it will be a little bit complicated, so the ease of use could be enhanced. I've worked with Fortinet and Cisco, and I think the UI is a litt...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Azure Web Application Firewall?

Because we mostly operate in the cloud and because we're a Microsoft environment, it was the best option in the scenario. The options were limited in terms of wanting to be an only Microsoft enviro...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Signal Sciences?

The pricing is very competitive compared to other providers. The pricing is definitely a factor in our decision-making process.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Signal Sciences?

We do use it, but the UI can be improved as we mostly work through the CI/CD. It provides support, but sometimes it is hard to navigate unless you are very familiar with it.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Signal Sciences?

The CDN is for caching and The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) is for protecting the servers from malicious traffic. They both perform different jobs and serve different purposes, ...

See all answers

Comparisons

AWS WAF vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 12% of the time

Fortinet FortiWeb vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 11% of the time

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 9% of the time

Azure Front Door vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 8% of the time

Azure Bastion vs Azure Web Application Firewall

Compared 3% of the time

More Azure Web Application Firewall Competitors

Sqreen vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)

Compared 15% of the time

AWS WAF vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)

Compared 14% of the time

Imperva Application Security Platform vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)

Compared 11% of the time

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)

Compared 8% of the time

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)

Compared 7% of the time

More The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Web Application Firewall

February 2026

Download Azure Web Application Firewall product report

Buyer's Guide

The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)

January 2026

The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) report

Download The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) product report

Also Known As

No data available

Signal Sciences Next-Gen WAF, Signal Sciences RASP

Overview

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.

Microsoft

The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) provides web application and API protection, RASP, rate limiting, bot protection and DDoS purpose built to eliminate the challenges of legacy WAF.

Fastly

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Chef, Adobe, Datadog, Etsy, GrubHub, Vimeo, SendGrid, Under Armour, Duo, AppNexus

Buyer's Guide

Azure Web Application Firewall vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)

February 2026

Free Report: Azure Web Application Firewall vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Web Application Firewall vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Azure Web Application Firewall vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) 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.