We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector and F5 Advanced WAF 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."They have a fantastic tool for analyzing and viewing your traffic."
"The product is user-friendly."
"All the solution's features are very good."
"The solution easily identifies, delays, or allows business traffic."
"The dashboard is the most interesting feature of the Akamai portal where you can have a detailed analysis of all the attacks that are happening. You can drill down an issue and see exactly what is happening, who are the bad guys attacking your website, and how Akamai is protecting the website. That is the most valuable feature."
"I like that the charges are all based on usage and labor costs. For the time that we spend onboarding almost 252020 FQDN, Akamai charges us only for the traffic usage, but it's only charging us for the labor costs for onboarding."
"The most valuable feature is the DDoS protection, which is the main reason we got it."
"The product has a good UI."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the overall capabilities, there is not a comparable solution on the market."
"iRules are quite appealing when it comes to F5."
"It can scale."
"It's a fairly easy-to-use and user-friendly tool. My administrators and team also like its ability to customize the rules per the requirements."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the WAF protection, Data Safe, and the seven-layer DDoS."
"There are a lot of good features."
"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 solution isn't too expensive. The license allows you to license what you need and leave out what you don't need."
"In terms of precedence of Akamai rules, the last one is implemented. That is the one that is operational. If two rules contradict, the last one is implemented. We had a clash, but it was really tough to find that out. I would like to have a rulebook because, in their architecture documentation, it is not mentioned anywhere that if two rules clash, the last one works, and if it does not work, then what to do. This is something we were debating today with their tech support. With AWS, we get documents for the issues so that they do not occur in the future. Akamai's support and knowledge base needs to be improved."
"If we talk about application layer attacks, including WAF, CloudFlare is leading. Akamai can focus a bit more on the application layer attacks and how to protect them."
"The solution could offer even more integrations."
"They are already very flexible, but room for improvement is there. Reports generation could be better and should be improved."
"There are some issues with pushing configurations across a network. It still takes about 20 minutes and that means to retract it's another 20 minutes."
"The performance of the cloud monitoring tool is low."
"One thing I asked them is to integrate the API discovery product that they have and push that data into Akamai App and API Protector so that we do not have two types of reviews to identify the type of traffic. We already know the APIs that are frequently getting used, so analysis becomes easier. We can integrate both products and use them."
"Support and the pricing need to improve."
"Nevertheless, F5 products are generally considered to be hard to deploy."
"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."
"I think the deployment templates can be better."
"F5 Advanced WAF needs better integration within the application, like remote dashboards."
"One thing that can be improved, is to increase the quantity over predefine policy."
"One area for improvement in the product is its SSO integration, which posed challenges and required significant effort to resolve."
"Its price should be better. It is expensive."
"The pricing could be more flexible."
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 8th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 27 reviews while F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 55 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Akamai App and API Protector writes "Easy to learn and gives us a report of traffic". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Prolexic and AWS Shield, whereas 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). See our Akamai App and API Protector 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.
