We performed a comparison between Imperva Web Application Firewall and Wallarm NG WAF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), F5, Microsoft and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."Very scalable and very stable firewall for web applications, with a good interface in its cloud version. Mitigation is its most valuable feature. The technical support for this product is also good."
"The most valuable features of Imperva Web Application Firewall are the monitoring of databases and the dashboards are easy to understand."
"The configurability of the tools and the ease of operation to be the most valuable feature of Imperva."
"The solution is cloud-based and offers us good uptime. It has combined web and API security. Therefore, with one license, you access both application security and also API security."
"Imperva monitors all traffic, even customer access, to the web application. Then, Imperva uses features like signatures to identify attacks like cross-site scripting or SQL injection."
"There are many features. There is ease of deployment. You can deploy the Imperva Web Application Firewall in two to three minutes. After that, you have to set the policies. For setting policies, you have toggle buttons. You can turn something on or off."
"It has threat intelligence and we are using Incapsula. With threat intelligence, we can separate HTTP and HTTPS traffic. We can use Incapsula to send all the threat intelligence to the WAF."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is stable."
"Helps us to monitor situation in regards to attacks to our sites and prevents a lot of them."
"The Imperva Web Application Firewall automations are good, but there is still room for improvement with them."
"It would be nice to have more security control over mobile applications so I would suggest adding more mobile security features. It would also be beneficial to see improvements in regards to interface bandwidth performance, CPU time, and RAM size. Learning capability of the device is quite weak."
"I am looking for more data enrichment. We should have the ability to add our own custom data to the system, to the live traffic."
"I'd like the option to pick your bot protection."
"The reporting is missing some features, such as: only two export formats, and the time period does not include the last day, week, year."
"There's always room for improvement. Occasionally, there might be false-positive alerts."
"One potential improvement for Imperva is enhancing its alert system."
"It's a complicated tool to keep."
"The biggest problem for us was the stability and speed using the first version of Wallarm. Now, it is fine."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 47 reviews while Wallarm NG WAF is ranked 33rd in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6, while Wallarm NG WAF is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Wallarm NG WAF writes "Active threat detection and adaptive rules are the most valuable for us". Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Azure Front Door, whereas Wallarm NG WAF is most compared with Salt Security, Noname Security, AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF and Cloudflare.
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.
