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.
"One common use case is using detection protection for enhancing security models in AWS. Another use case is implementing log analysis and response recovery procedures for email services."
"The access instruction feature is the most valuable. This is what we use the most."
"The tool’s stability is very good."
"It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed."
"This product supplies options for web security for applications accessing sensitive information."
"The most valuable feature is that it is very easy to configure. It just takes a couple of minutes."
"The solution is stable."
"The simple configuration and the scalability have been most valuable. We are able to scale across all of our different AWS instances."
"Identification, ease of use, and ease of modifying it to most of our needs are valuable."
"In terms of F5 Advanced WAF's most valuable features, I would definitely say its stability. F5 is one the most stable products. Either as the load balancer or the web application firewall, it is very stable."
"It's scalable and very easy to manage."
"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."
"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."
"Feature-wise, they are always cutting edge and up-to-date. Many features aren't available via competitors. There's always a lot of enhanced critical features that just aren't available through anyone else, or, if they are, are too lightweight."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the easy identification of events and customization. We can pinpoint our settings."
"We can monitor IP locations, but we have constraints from each country. It has a replication feature. Licenses can be shared, taking turns with each license."
"The default content policy available in the tool is not very strong compared to the competitors."
"The setup is complicated."
"The solution's pricing could be improved."
"One area that could be improved is the DDoS protection."
"The cost must be reduced."
"We don't have much control over blocking, because the WAF is managed by AWS."
"AWS WAF would be better if it uses AI or machine learning to detect a potential attack or a potential IP that creates an attack even before it happens. I want AWS WAF to capture the IP and automatically write the rule to automate the entire process."
"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."
"The solution should include RASP for another level of protection at the code itself."
"The tool needs to improve its pricing."
"The BIG-IQ is supposed to centralize the management for all of the boxes but it's not very effective."
"F5 Advanced needs to improve its bot protection. The solution needs to have machine learning to learn the behavior of the customer to recognize the human versus the bot. This is a difficult feature to explain to our customers. I would like documentation about the bot feature to make it easier for the customer to understand."
"They could provide better pricing."
"I would like for there to be a cloud-based solution, this would also help to improve scalability."
"Compatibility with multiple cloud environments needs improvement. Both stability and scalability need to be improved."
"They should work on the virtualization of NGINX."
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.