We performed a comparison between Cloudflare Web Application Firewall 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."Caching is the most valuable feature of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall."
"The product has improved our security posture by blocking bad actors."
"Technical support has a very fast response time and they are helpful."
"It protects web applications efficiently."
"The initial setup process is simple."
"It is configurable via API."
"Does a good job preventing web application attacks."
"It is a SaaS solution unlike much of the competition."
"iRules are quite appealing when it comes to F5."
"It can scale."
"The web application firewall itself is most valuable. It provides positive security and negative security. In negative security, it blocks a task such as cross-site scripting, code injection, etc. In positive security, it lets you specify and enforce things, such as the parameters allowed in username and password fields and the number of characters allowed in a field."
"The product has valuable features for load balancing, monitoring tools, and HPXpress services."
"F5 Advanced WAF has very good stability and scalability. Its initial setup was straightforward."
"F5 Advanced WAF is a stable solution, we are satisfied. It is more stable than ForiWeb."
"Good technology for mitigating different application attacks, e.g. DDoS, DNS, and layer seven attacks."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the security features and the protection."
"Their documentation could be better. They don't have documentation that explains everything well. They have documentation for everything you're looking for, but they lack a single piece of documentation to tie everything together. As a new user or beginner, it took us a little bit of time to figure out how to put all these things in place."
"The reporting could be more granular."
"Its stability could be better."
"It would be ideal if the solution offered better log integration and more integration with different platforms."
"The blocked logs are difficult to read at times."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should include port forwarding features."
"I have experienced some difficulties with Cloudflare's support as a customer based in India."
"They have some limitations with third-party integrations."
"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."
"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 could improve the precision of the scanning. There are many false positives. They should improve their threat database."
"F5 Advanced WAF could improve the reporting. It's a bit difficult to populate, them. If you're not so familiar with the functions, such as where to find the logs and other settings."
"For me, an area for improvement in F5 Advanced WAF is the reporting as it isn't so clear. The vendor needs to work on the reporting capability of the solution. What I'd like to see in the next release of F5 Advanced WAF is threat intelligence to protect your web application, particularly having that capability out-of-the-box, and not needing to pay extra for it, similar to what's offered in FortiWeb, for example, any request that originates from a malicious IP will be blocked automatically by FortiWeb. F5 Advanced WAF should have the intelligence for blocking malicious IPs, or automatically blocking threats included in the license, instead of making it an add-on feature that users have to pay for apart from the standard licensing fees."
"I would like for there to be a cloud-based solution, this would also help to improve scalability."
"It's sometimes difficult to customize APIs with F5 Advanced WAF."
"The BNS module needs improvement."
More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is ranked 7th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 16 reviews while F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 55 reviews. Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is rated 8.2, while F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall writes "A cloud solution for web application firewall protection with rate-limiting, managed, and custom firewall rules". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Akamai App and API Protector, AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb and Radware Alteon, 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 Cloudflare Web Application Firewall 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.
