Comodo cWatch vs Wallarm NG WAF comparison

Xcitium and Wallarm are both solutions in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category. Xcitium is ranked #26 with an average rating of 9.0, while Wallarm is ranked #40. Xcitium holds a 1.1% mindshare in WAF, compared to Wallarm’s 0.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Xcitium users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Wallarm users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 1, 2025

Wallarm NG WAF and Comodo cWatch compete in the web application security domain. Wallarm NG WAF seems to have the upper hand in ease of deployment and user satisfaction with pricing, while Comodo cWatch may offer superior features with a broader range of capabilities.

Features: Wallarm NG WAF offers robust API security, AI-driven threat detection, and adaptive security rules for efficient threat management. Comodo cWatch provides a comprehensive security suite with malware removal, a file integrity monitoring system, and adherence to PCI DSS and HIPAA guidelines for sensitive data protection.

Room for Improvement: Wallarm NG WAF could enhance its integration capabilities, expand its reporting features, and offer more advanced analytics. Comodo cWatch might improve its deployment simplicity, increase automation in threat detection, and enhance user interface for better usability.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Wallarm NG WAF is praised for its streamlined deployment process and responsive customer service, minimizing downtime. Comodo cWatch, while competitive, potentially requires more technical investment but generally offers well-rated support.

Pricing and ROI: Wallarm NG WAF is recognized for cost-effectiveness with affordable setup and substantial ROI. Comodo cWatch, despite higher initial costs, promises significant ROI through its expansive feature set, appealing to those prioritizing comprehensive coverage.

To learn more, read our detailed Comodo cWatch vs. Wallarm NG WAF Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Comodo cWatch vs. Wallarm NG WAF

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,933 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

Cloudflare Web Application ...

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is 5.4%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Comodo cWatch is 1.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Wallarm NG WAF is 0.8%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall	5.4%
Comodo cWatch	1.1%
Wallarm NG WAF	0.8%
Other	92.7%

Web Application Firewall (WAF)

Featured Reviews

Dean Barisic

CTO at PlayNirvana

Advanced security reporting has protected high-traffic betting platforms from constant attacks

I don't see room for improvement to Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. One thing I don't know much about because we have a dedicated IT team for that, and I'm not involved with Cloudflare much anymore. But if I were to compare them to F5, I would like to see more features that F5 offers. F5 has an option to bring the whole infrastructure, the whole WAF and all their packages, Bot Management, and everything else on your infrastructure. You need to install certain services from their side, and then you can choose if you would like requests to hit your servers immediately or if requests need to be proxied through F5 backbone. That would be a nice addition because we have 90% of the traffic as legit traffic coming from whitelisted servers. If it comes from whitelisted servers, I don't need to go every request through the backbone; I could easily just IP whitelist everything. Then I could maybe have Bot Management on my infrastructure that drastically reduces the price of Cloudflare. I would like to see Push CDN more improved in the next release of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. And maybe something similar to Pushpin that Fastly has, which is an option where you can push messages that then can be scaled globally over the network. From our perspective, if we have a listener that listens for stock updates, I would just need to have one processor that pushes those updates to the Cloudflare API, and then Cloudflare would broadcast that message to all listeners. Cloudflare will check the order of the message, and if you, as a customer, are not connected or have some kind of network issue, when you reconnect, you will receive the latest state and missing updates.

Read full review

Bernardo Murillo

Director De Netquatro at Netquatro

Alerts organizations if any malware is detected and removes it quickly

The solution allows me to change my logo. It gives me a white-label portal because I am a partner. OWASP has been the most effective in malware prevention. It can detect if the headers are okay and do FTP scans. We get alerts if we have some malware. It is removed very quickly.

Read full review

it_user796242

Information Security Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees

Helps us to monitor attacks to our sites and prevents a lot of them

Set up Wallarm as a reverse proxy. Do not replace your web server. Use Wallarm first in monitoring mode, then learn from Wallarm which type of request is false positive and which type of request is not. This process takes a couple of weeks for very highly-loaded web applications (few millions of unique visitors in one month). Then you can turn Wallarm into blocking mode and everything will be fine. Do not forget to build a monitoring system, the wave, and API for it. Before we started using Wallarm, I already knew Ivan (CEO) and Stepan (COO) from a couple of years before. Ivan had his own security company and Stepan was working on a Russian security magazine called Xakep. They told us that they wanted to create a new WAF and already had a working version of it. They asked me to test it. We did tests, and it was really good. After few month after testing, we signed an agreement. Our choice was made not because we knew these guys for a long time, but because the product was really cool and we were glad to start using it as one of the first on the market!

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

"Cloudflare WAF provides protection through rules and functionalities like Cloudflare's SDRAP."

"Cloudflare is cheaper compared to Azure WAF, which I have considered before."

"The initial setup process is simple."

"The product has a valuable security control functionality."

"We extensively use the solution every day. The solution is very stable; we haven’t seen any glitches."

"The setup process is very simple for me."

"The impact of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's integration with existing web technologies on our site's performance and security measures is quite great, actually."

"It is a SaaS solution unlike much of the competition."

More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall pros

"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."

"The FIM feature, the information in the new management system, and their support are the most valuable features. The scanned results are quite fast as compared to other platforms compared to scanning timing. It takes about a minute or two minutes. Also, the results of the Comodo scan results are in detail."

"We get alerts if we have some malware."

"Perimeter control and active vulnerability scanner are the most valuable features."

"They are the only solution that fits our success criteria and business objectives: WAF must have a low (<5%) false negative rate and be ready to protect from all well-known web attacks."

"Vulnerability scanner and WAF are valuable features."

"The most powerful feature is the ability to first learn what type of query to make to your web application when it is attacked and what type of query creates a false positive to your app."

"Helps us to monitor situation in regards to attacks to our sites and prevents a lot of them."

"With active threat detection, we are no longer over-swamped with tons of useless events."

Cons

"The notification part could be improved. It's very much connected to Web Application Firewall, rate-limiting, and DDoS protection."

"A key challenge arises when dealing with numerous integrations with HVAC systems. Depending on the specifics, there might be some configuration mismatches, which necessitate specific support."

"It would be ideal if the solution offered better log integration and more integration with different platforms."

"The reporting could be more granular."

"The blocked logs are difficult to read at times."

"The learning curve was steep initially."

"The ModSecurity core rules need to be updated."

"There could be an option to duplicate the cluster to maintain the consistency of rules."

More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall cons

"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."

"The portal is a little slow."

"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."

"It needs more customization in PDF reports."

"There were several stability issues during the first pilot."

"Technical support is 6 or 7 out of 10. Sometimes we have had trouble with communication and understanding."

"The biggest problem for us was the stability and speed using the first version of Wallarm. Now, it is fine."

"Wallarm uses a learning mechanism to detect attacks and to avoid false positives. If Wallarm blocks some illegitimate request, then you can go to the management console and mark this request as false positive, but sometimes this does not work properly."

"The biggest problem for us was the stability and speed using the first version of Wallarm."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It starts at $20 and can easily go up to $200 monthly"

"It is not too pricey."

"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is more affordable than other solutions."

"The solution is expensive."

"The annual licensing fee is $10,000 USD."

"The pricing model is very straightforward compared to the competition. You just pay per month for the product and usage."

"The solution's pricing option needs to be more transparent for enterprise clients."

"What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? I believe the pricing is not the best, but it's reasonable and acceptable. We also use the McAfee system in parallel. In terms of pricing, its okay - not great, but not bad either. It falls in the middle, which is acceptable. In terms of support licensing, last time, we were searching for a solution, and we considered products from resellers rather than directly from the cloud provider. However, the pricing we encountered was exceptionally high. As a result, we are inclined to select support from the reseller."

More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall pricing and cost advice

"Comodo cWatch’s first level, which has fewer features, costs $7."

"Pricing must be cheaper than the competition and the licensing must be good."

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

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

No data available

Financial Services Firm

14%

Government

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	6

No data available

Questions from the Community

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

The price of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is reasonable.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall?

I don't see room for improvement to Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. One thing I don't know much about because we...

See all answers

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

We are using Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's advanced reporting and analytics tools with their Zero Trust, so e...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Comodo cWatch?

The portal is a little slow. I have to wait for it to load all the information. CDN's performance must be improved.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Comodo cWatch?

I use the solution to detect vulnerabilities in the site.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Comodo cWatch?

Comodo cWatch’s price is very good compared to Cloudflare’s. The first level of Cloudflare costs us about $20. The ne...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Fortinet FortiWeb vs Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

Compared 8% of the time

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

Compared 7% of the time

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

Compared 6% of the time

Azure Web Application Firewall vs Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

Compared 6% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

Compared 5% of the time

More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall Competitors

Atomic ModSecurity Rules vs Comodo cWatch

Compared 24% of the time

SiteLock vs Comodo cWatch

Compared 23% of the time

Cloudflare vs Comodo cWatch

Compared 16% of the time

Sucuri vs Comodo cWatch

Compared 13% of the time

AWS WAF vs Comodo cWatch

Compared 4% of the time

More Comodo cWatch Competitors

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Wallarm NG WAF

Compared 10% of the time

Akamai API Security vs Wallarm NG WAF

Compared 10% of the time

Cequence Security vs Wallarm NG WAF

Compared 10% of the time

Venusense Web Application Firewall vs Wallarm NG WAF

Compared 8% of the time

AWS WAF vs Wallarm NG WAF

Compared 4% of the time

More Wallarm NG WAF Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall

March 2026

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall report

Download Cloudflare Web Application Firewall product report

Buyer's Guide

CDN

March 2026

Download Comodo cWatch product report

Buyer's Guide

Web Application Firewall (WAF)

March 2026

Download Wallarm NG WAF product report

Also Known As

Cloudflare WAF

cWatch

Wallarm NG-WAF

Overview

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's intuitive dashboard enables users to build powerful rules through easy clicks and also provides Terraform integration. Every request to the WAF is inspected against the rule engine and the threat intelligence curated from protecting over 27 Million websites. Suspicious requests can be blocked, challenged or logged as per the needs of the user while legitimate requests are routed to the destination, agnostic of whether it lives on-premise or in the cloud. Analytics and Cloudflare Logs enable visibility into actionable metrics for the user.

Cloudflare

Cwatch delivers robust website protection from hackers - while it helps you stay calm when online. It does not just stop with protection but helps in scanning the website to remove malware instantly. It is a complete website security tool that delivers state-of-the-art protection techniques to ensure SMB website security from simple to complex threat landscape. It ensures early threat detection, instant solution and sophisticated preventive measures.

Xcitium

Wallarm NG WAF provides advanced security by integrating machine learning, making it essential for modern web applications. It offers protection against sophisticated threats and automates many processes.

Wallarm NG WAF leverages AI-driven technology to deliver robust security measures. It helps in defending web applications from cybersecurity threats with enhanced threat detection and response capabilities. Beyond vulnerability insights, Wallarm enhances security protocols, scales with growing online demands, and ensures comprehensive threat coverage, fostering a safer web environment.

What are the key features of Wallarm NG WAF?

AI-Powered Threat Detection: Identifies and mitigates sophisticated attacks efficiently.
Automated Security Updates: Continuously updates defense strategies without manual intervention.
Flexible Deployment: Easily integrates across cloud, on-premise, and hybrid setups.
Scalability: Adapts to growing traffic volumes with consistent protection.
Detailed Reporting: Provides comprehensive analytics on web security posture.

What benefits can users expect from Wallarm NG WAF?

Increased Security: Enhances threat detection and reduces vulnerabilities.
Operational Efficiency: Reduces manual intervention with automated tasks.
Cost-Effectiveness: Optimizes security expenditure by preventing potential breaches.
Time Savings: Automates repetitive actions, saving valuable time for IT teams.

In industries like finance, e-commerce, and healthcare, Wallarm NG WAF is implemented to ensure data protection and compliance with stringent security standards. Its adaptability allows it to meet industry-specific requirements, offering specialized configurations tailored to each sector's unique demands.

Wallarm

Sample Customers

crunchbase, udacity, marketo, okcupid, zendesk

Xerox, Intel, HP, UPS, Western Union, Western Digital

Panasonic. Miro. Rappi. Wargaming. Gannett. Omio. Acronis. Workforce Software. Tipalti. SEMRush.

Buyer's Guide

Comodo cWatch vs. Wallarm NG WAF

March 2026

Free Report: Comodo cWatch vs. Wallarm NG WAF

Find out what your peers are saying about Comodo cWatch vs. Wallarm NG WAF and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Comodo cWatch vs. Wallarm NG WAF 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.