We performed a comparison between F5 Advanced WAF and Imperva DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the balancer and you can change policies very easily."
"F5 Advanced WAF is a stable solution, we are satisfied. It is more stable than ForiWeb."
"The best solution for WAF."
"It's flexible and powerful, and the users can input their own rules to the system."
"The solution is easily accessible on mobile and laptop devices."
"One of the most valuable features is the Local Traffic Manager."
"The valuable features vary from customers to customers. Some customers are okay with the basic features of the WAF, and some customers use advanced WAF with a few other features."
"The most valuable features of the F5 Advanced WAF are the enhanced ASM and the performance. Additionally, the usability and effectiveness are very good."
"The dashboard is good and user-friendly."
"On the site security, I can see which countries have incidents, whether it was a robot attack, a real human user, or non-human user."
"There are quite a few useful Imperva Incapsula features. For example, one of them is the reports. The graphics are very good and it's easy to configure. The whole process is very fast and reliable too. They have good tech support as well."
"The most valuable features are DDoS protection."
"Provides Anti-DDoS protection, as well as other protections like SQL injection, Cross-Site Scripting, and antiscanner. These types of protection are valuable to the business due to the daily attacks on our portals, and that often cannot be seen without a tool like this."
"Simplifies putting everything in code."
"I like the user-friendly interface."
"Setup was straightforward, very simple. I only entered the domain and Incapsula returned the DNS data that I needed to change for the protection to be configured."
"The reporting could be clearer and embedded to include our movement data."
"The contextual-based component needs a lot of help to catch up with the next-gen products."
"I would like to see additional controls."
"Its price should be better. It is expensive."
"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."
"F5 Advanced WAF needs better integration within the application, like remote dashboards."
"It should be a little bit easy to deploy in terms of the overall deployment session. One of our customers is a bit unhappy about the reporting options. Currently, it automatically deletes event logs after some limit if a customer doesn't have any external Syslog server. It is a problem for those customers who want to review event logs after a week or so because they won't get proper reports or event logs. They should increase the duration to at least a month or two for storing the data on the device. F5 is not a leader in Gartner Quadrant, which affects us when we go and pitch this solution. Customers normally go and take a look at such annual reports, and because F5 is currently not there as a leader, the customers ask about it even though we are saying it is good in all things. F5 is not known for something totally different or unique. They were a major player in ADP, and they are just rebranding themselves into security. They should improve or increase their marketing as a security company now. They have already started to do that, but they should do it more so that when it comes to security, customers can easily remember F5. At the moment, if we say F5, load balancing comes to mind. With rebranding and marketing, all customers should get the idea that F5 is now mainly focusing on the security part of it, and it is a security company instead of load balancing. This is the first solution that should come to a customer's mind for a web application firewall."
"Scalability could be improved."
"The salespeople tend to exaggerate its capabilities, which can cost you money if you don't verify the information."
"The log analytics interface within Incapsula isn't really good. For example, if you have to get all logs from there, it's a very cumbersome process."
"We would like them to hire people in Sweden because it's quite hard when people are sitting in the UK or Belgium because some of the customers really want them to be local."
"A limited tool if you're looking to customize."
"Imperva should have more points of presence in Africa."
"Analytics in the area of risk need to be improved to supply more information to the users for creating better environments."
"Users would benefit from better documentation. There is official documentation, but sometimes we need more detail. We have some use cases that are not so run of the mill. It would be great if there was a knowledge base that we could go to for more answers."
"I miss being able to integrate the dashboard with other BI tools we are using. We have to export and import data to be able to present it, and doing so is a lot of work."
F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 55 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 19th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 74 reviews. F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and AWS WAF. See our F5 Advanced WAF vs. Imperva DDoS 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.