We compared AWS WAF and F5 Advanced WAF based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Users have praised AWS WAF for its effective protection against web application attacks, customizable rule sets, and affordable pricing. On the other hand, F5 Advanced WAF stands out for its robust security measures, advanced threat intelligence, and user-friendly interface. However, AWS WAF users appreciate the responsive customer support, while F5 Advanced WAF users value its seamless integration with existing systems. Both products have areas that need improvement, with AWS WAF users looking for better documentation and customization options, and F5 Advanced WAF users desiring a more intuitive interface and comprehensive support for troubleshooting.
Features: AWS WAF offers effective protection against web application attacks, easy setup and configuration, flexibility in setting rules, and integration with other AWS services. F5 Advanced WAF provides robust security measures, advanced threat intelligence, efficient traffic management, and customizable policies.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for AWS WAF is minimal, with a smooth and straightforward process. Users find the licensing flexible and customizable. On the other hand, F5 Advanced WAF also has a minimal setup cost, making installation hassle-free. Users appreciate the straightforward and easy-to-manage licensing., AWS WAF's ROI is reflected in increased security, reduced risks, and improved web threat protection. It also offers cost savings and efficient management. On the other hand, F5 Advanced WAF's ROI is seen in improved security, enhanced visibility, and reduced cyber threats. It effectively protects web applications for a safe user experience. Overall, both products deliver valuable and beneficial ROI.
Room for Improvement: AWS WAF users have requested better documentation and detailed instructions for users with limited technical expertise. They also want a more user-friendly interface, enhanced customization options, and greater flexibility in configuring rule sets. F5 Advanced WAF users have expressed concerns about a lack of user-friendly interface, complexity in configuration, and a need for improved documentation and better support for troubleshooting and resolving issues. Overall, they desire a more streamlined and intuitive experience.
Deployment and customer support: Based on user feedback, it is necessary to consider the duration required for different phases of implementing a new tech solution. For AWS WAF, users mentioned distinct timeframes for deployment and setup, while for F5 Advanced WAF, users mentioned similar timeframes for deployment and setup., AWS WAF's customer service is consistently praised for being excellent and highly responsive. Users appreciate the knowledgeable support team who go above and beyond. On the other hand, F5 Advanced WAF's support has received positive feedback for their prompt and helpful assistance.
The summary above is based on 56 interviews we conducted recently with AWS WAF and F5 Advanced WAF users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"As a basic WAF, it's better than nothing. So if you need something simple out of the box with default features, AWS WAF is good."
"It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed."
"The tool’s stability is very good."
"Stable and scalable web application firewall. Setting it up is straightforward."
"The most valuable features of AWS WAF are its cloud-native and on-demand."
"The most valuable aspect is that it protects our code. It's a bit difficult to overwrite code in our application. It also protects against threats."
"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."
"AWS WAF is a stable solution. The performance of the solution is very good."
"The most valuable feature of F5 Advanced WAF is its grand unity of the implementation, where you have the freedom to configure based on how it affects your use case or your organization. With the default setting of implicit deny, you can gradually start defining and deploying the tool to align with your environment, whether it is outdated, recent, or futuristic. This allows you to customize the solution to protect you from threat actors. You have the ability to define what the advanced threat act should do - whether it should alert, deny, or both - and it will deliver based on your configuration. Unlike other online solutions, F5 Advanced WAF provides flexibility to deliver to your unique environment the way you want."
"The best solution for WAF."
"It also has antivirus and DDoS mitigation capabilities. We have enabled these features."
"F5 technical support is excellent. They are experts who always provide the right solution, and they understand the problem. Their response and resolution times are good."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are SSL uploading, signature, and anomaly detection. It is overall a high-quality solution."
"This solution is an enterprise-class firewall that provides both load-balancing and security."
"F5 Advanced WAF has very good stability and scalability. Its initial setup was straightforward."
"I like all of the features, but the main one is the attack signatures."
"The price could be improved."
"In a future release of this solution, I would like to see additional management features to make things simpler."
"The default content policy available in the tool is not very strong compared to the competitors."
"One area that could be improved is the DDoS protection."
"The product must provide more features."
"The cost must be reduced."
"The product should improve the DDoS-related features."
"In a future release I would like to see automation. There's no interaction between the applications and that makes it tedious. We have to do the preparation all over again for each of our other applications."
"We usually use a third-party tool for logging and reporting. It would be nice if we could do that right on this solution. They have one, but it's not very stable. Logging and reporting effectively would be a big enhancement."
"People who want to work with the device have to be pro in Linux"
"The interface is old-looking, it's not modern, which is why it's not always comfortable to use."
"While F5 Advanced WAF does limit the number of partners in certain regions to ensure successful business transactions, they could also benefit from expanding their partnerships and making it easier for more people to learn about and become experts in F5 Advanced WAF. By doing so, they could increase the reach and exposure of their solution, similar to how Cisco has become widely recognized in the security industry."
"We get false positives sometimes."
"One thing that can be improved, is to increase the quantity over predefine policy."
"There should be more ability to rate limit certain scenarios. The majority of the time, it is either on or off. For certain types of use cases, there should be the ability to rate limit, not just enable or disable."
"The administrator's user interface and some of the settings can sometimes be very complicated to understand."
AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews while F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 55 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.0, while F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of AWS WAF writes "A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Imperva Web Application Firewall, Fortinet FortiWeb and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, whereas F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Imperva Web Application Firewall, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. See our AWS WAF vs. F5 Advanced 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.