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

NETSCOUT Arbor DDoS Protection & Mitigation vs Neustar UltraDDoS [EOL] comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 12, 2026

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

NETSCOUT Arbor DDoS Protect...
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
57
Ranking in other categories
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (4th)
Neustar UltraDDoS [EOL]
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

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.
JT
Manager Strategic Planning at Endurance International Group
Identifies a request that comes up multiple times, block holds that particular IP, and lets the genuine traffic pass through
Genuine traffic coming in is still getting better. While I understand that it's some sort of algorithm that is written in this scale, that algorithm can be a little bit better because sometimes while we are doing DDoS mitigation, genuine traffic does get blocked. While it is one of the greatest features it can still be improved. I would like to see a dashboard that shows you the data that is transferred from which end. It's where people start looking at abuse management. People keep questioning when the mitigation is on what service it is and how many GBs are passing through. An end user dashboard that will help you identify all of these questions and that can be visible in your entire organization is something that would make sense.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Overall, it's a great product."
"Without Arbor, we'd probably be around 75 to 80 percent uptime."
"Valuable features include simple and centralized management of user access and capabilities, as well as Web 2.0 interactive attack alerting, traffic visualization, and mitigation service control."
"The AI capabilities and anomaly detection using machine learning modules like isolation forests and auto-encoders are the most effective in mitigating DDoS attacks."
"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."
"Arbor's technical support is very good, we've had no issues with it."
"Arbor DDoS is easy to use, provides effective blocking of DDoS attacks, and can be used for DNS, web, and main servers. Additionally, this solution is far easier to operate than others solutions, such as Fortinet DDoS."
"We found what we wanted in Arbor DDoS; it met our expectations as IT users of different types of complex environments and fit our needs."
"Scalability is awesome, and they have grown two folds or three folds since we started using them, with no concerns even as we protect close to 60,000 hosted sites for business and e-commerce customers."
"In the DDoS it's difficult to validate what is a genuine request from an end user. We've started being able to do that with the logistics that they have set up. With the protection that they have provided, they are able to identify what is valid and what is not valid. We see that a person who is getting DDoS Neustar service is able to block that particular user. However, while they are doing that it doesn't affect other customers on the server."
 

Cons

"They should improve the reporting section and make it a little bit more detailed. I would like to have much better and more detailed reports."
"The product could have end-to-end platform visibility."
"Arbor DDoS could improve out-of-the-box reporting, it could be better."
"I would also like more visibility into their bad actor feeds, their fingerprint feeds. We try to be good stewards of the internet, so if there are attacks, or bad actors within our networks, if there were an easier way for us to find them, we could stop them from doing their malicious activity, and at the same time save money."
"I believe that the Arbor Cloud should be available, even if the customer does not have any Arbor appliance on-premise."
"Support in Argentina is not so good. Although the team is good, they are not fast, and they lack the skills to manage dynamic attackers."
"New versions are sometimes released before the bugs are worked out."
"An improvement to Arbor DDoS would be to make evaluation licenses and virtual machines available."
"Genuine traffic coming in is still getting better because sometimes while we are doing DDoS mitigation, genuine traffic does get blocked."
"I would like to see a dashboard that shows you the data that is transferred from which end. It's where people start looking at abuse management. People keep questioning when the mitigation is on what service it is and how many GBs are passing through. An end user dashboard that will help you identify all of these questions and that can be visible in your entire organization is something that would make sense."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Arbor is striking a good balance between pricing and what they deliver."
"There is room for improvement with the pricing. It is an expensive solution. The issue with the pricing is more the way it is built. Right now we're paying per router, and there's a limitation there. I would like to see bundle-pricing where there is an overall solution cost."
"The licensing of a complete Arbor solution, including fire-walling and unified site management, can get expensive."
"The price is a little high."
"Arbor's products are very expensive. Their competitors are cheap when compared with Arbor."
"Our customers always complain about the price of the product."
"The pricing of the solution is cheap."
"Because the solutions from competitors are very different, it's not easy to compare. However, the licensing from Arbor is clear and understandable and the pricing is reasonable when looking at the market, in general."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection solutions are best for your needs.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
No data available
 

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
 

Also Known As

Arbor Networks SP, Arbor Networks TMS, Arbor Cloud for ENT
Neustar UltraDDoS, UltraDDoS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Xtel Communications
Choxi
Find out what your peers are saying about Radware, Cloudflare, Imperva and others in Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection. Updated: October 2026.
921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.