Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall vs Microsoft Azure Application Gateway comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Ivanti Virtual Web Applicat...
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
16th
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
50th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Azure Application...
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
4th
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
5th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall is 1.4%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is 6.6%, down from 8.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway6.6%
Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall1.4%
Other92.0%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer890211 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
Good feature set and is simple to deploy
In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered. We've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else. We sort of stopped deploying them because of that. There are additional costs to the standard licensing. There are bandwidth prices. The feature set is quite good. We've been told to stop using them because of the price. If they can do something to address that I believe it would be better. On the latest version they've got a community edition, which is quite a good bandwidth, but in essence, it's to address the entry-level price. When you get to 10 gig bandwidth, it's way too expensive.
SS
Cloud Specialist at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Mutual TLS has secured our web services and now needs broader protocol support
The most valuable feature we have found in Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is mutual TLS. We find mutual TLS valuable because we can verify the client securely by setting up the trust certificate of the client, and also if we do it at the client side as well. This successfully develops mutual trust, ensuring that we know the client who is calling our service is a legitimate client. That is a very nice feature.Microsoft Azure Application Gateway has helped manage our traffic efficiently because we have many web services that we can put behind the same URL, and we can have different URLs with the same Application Gateway with a limited number of listeners. We can do host-based routing as well as URL-based routing or path-based routing. It supports both, so we can have even a single URL supporting many applications, or we can have different URLs for different applications respectively. We have both use cases.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that it is simple to deploy. The deployment took us ten minutes."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is traffic management."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"It is a scalable solution...The installation phase of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is very easy."
"Microsoft has a vast variety of tools, and it blends very well."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"Microsoft has a vast variety of tools, and it blends very well."
 

Cons

"In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered. We've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is not scalable."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive."
"It is a bit tricky to configure. You've got to have a very specific format to configure it. They should make it a little bit easier to configure. Mapping the certificates into it isn't easy, and it could be better. Currently, you've to write a bit of automation to pull certificates directly to HTTPS."
"The solution doesn’t support wildcard-based and regular expression-based rules."
"It could be easier to change servicing."
"The product's performance should be better."
"The solution is easy to use overall, but the dashboard could be updated with a better layout and graphical design so that we can see the data a bit easier. Microsoft could also add more documentation. The documentation Microsoft provides doesn't tell us about resource requirements. We found that the instances we had weren't sufficient to support the firewall, so we had to increase them."
"We have encountered some issues with automatic redirection and cancellation, leading to 502 and 504 gateway errors. So, I experienced some trouble with containers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I rate the price of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway an eight out of ten."
"The solution is paid monthly. The solution is highly expensive."
"The pricing is based on how much you use the solution."
"It is an expensive solution. We have an enterprise agreement, it is monthly."
"I rate the pricing seven out of ten because some third-party solutions are even costlier than this."
"The product is not expensive."
"We use the tool's basic subscription. Its licensing costs are monthly."
"There is some additional cost, such as extended support."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What's the difference between Azure Front Door and Application Gateway?
We found Azure Front Door to be easily scaled and very stable. The implementation is very fast and Microsoft provides excellent support. Azure Front Door can quickly detect abnormalities before the...
How does AWS WAF compare to Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit ...
What do you like most about Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Application Gateway automatically redirects unwanted users and takes care of the security aspect. It also handles the performance side of things, which is why we use it.
 

Also Known As

Pulse vWAF, Pulse Virtual Traffic Manager
Azure Application Gateway, MS Azure Application Gateway
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Gilt Groupe
Lilly, AccuWeather, AIRFRANCE, Honeywell
Find out what your peers are saying about NetScaler, F5, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.