We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector 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."It enables us to move faster with new products because we have this layer of protection set up in our infrastructure."
"The most valuable feature is the custom rules feature. This is because many of our customers require a lot of custom rules. Because it's a very customized project for our customers, I think they have the best of everything already."
"The solution can scale extremely well."
"They have a fantastic tool for analyzing and viewing your traffic."
"I can attest to its benefits in terms of understanding and mitigating threats...The solution's technical support team seems to be pretty responsive."
"We are getting security for each and every API."
"The product has a good user interface."
"Everything will be handled by Akamai's system before it reaches our infrastructure."
"On the activity log, I can see the exact details, the visit, and the threat."
"Simplifies putting everything in code."
"I like the user-friendly interface."
"On the real time, you can see live traffic, which is flowing into our website."
"Integration with IBM AS/400 and Db2 is okay."
"The solution has a very good interface."
"DDoS protection and WAF are the most valuable features. It is easy to deploy a service. It is easy and quick to deploy to a new website."
"We have peace of mind that nobody will use malware on us or try to hack our website."
"The interface is a little bit clunky and can 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."
"Could integrate more features for each security."
"Support and the pricing need to improve."
"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."
"Customer support has room for improvement."
"The pricing could be reduced a bit."
"The solution could offer even more integrations."
"The product could use a broader scope in the area of policies."
"A limited tool if you're looking to customize."
"There’s nothing that’s missing in terms of features."
"We had an issue when securing the web applications for DDoS protection."
"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."
"Imperva now offers add-ons to add functionality, but I would like to see these included in the product, even if it would cost more."
"It's quite expensive."
"Certificate management could be improved."
Akamai App and API Protector is ranked 8th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 27 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 16th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 74 reviews. Akamai App and API Protector is rated 8.4, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. 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 Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". Akamai App and API Protector is most compared with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Prolexic and Azure Front Door, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and Fortinet FortiADC. See our Akamai App and API Protector vs. Imperva DDoS report.
See our list of best Web Application Firewall (WAF) vendors and best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.