We performed a comparison between A10 Thunder TPS and Imperva DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution's support is one of the coolest things about the product. I"
"Based on previous equipment that we had, it's amazing that this device can do what it can do in a 1U form factor. The devices that we have right now have never gone over capacity and we've actually mitigated some pretty large attacks."
"We selected the solution because of its programmable automated defense using RESTful API. We didn't want to connect to the box. We wanted to be able to do some automation. We wanted to have our own portal because we wanted to connect our customers to our own UI using the A10 API. It has been good and exactly what we need."
"The most valuable feature of A10 Thunder TPS is load balancing."
"We can keep track of all the customer's requirements. We can forecast our trails and we can forecast our overall financial things."
"The primary benefit that we see from their systems is that their filtering technology has the ability to detect and drop the malicious traffic from the legitimate traffic with a high success rate. That, in combination with the very small effort needed to manage their systems, are the two most important benefits to us."
"They give us the ability to configure many features for DDoS. There are many items that we can use."
"The GUI is very use-friendly. You can configure it through CLI or GUI, they give you an option to choose. It's a good solution in terms of the appliance itself. It's very light compared to other brands that offer DDoS solutions."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is easy to configure."
"The dashboard is good and user-friendly."
"I like the user-friendly interface."
"On the real time, you can see live traffic, which is flowing into our website."
"The solution is very good at intercepting traffic before it gets to our data centers."
"On the activity log, I can see the exact details, the visit, and the threat."
"The solution has a very good interface."
"Imperva Incapsula has many valuable features. One, it protects the top 10 OWAS vulnerability, the open web application software platform, this is standard. Secondly, it protects against broken authentication. As well, it has remote execution of code."
"I rate Thunder TPS seven out of 10 for scalability."
"The last issue we had to contact them about was just a question of a false-positive. The A10 system wasn't supposed to decide what is a false-positive. So if we send it good traffic, it's supposed to just pass that good traffic through. But we opened this last ticket because the A10 did block some of the good traffic. Their support had to tweak it a little bit, but it wasn't anything that took a long time."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"They have a cloud scrubbing feature that redirects the traffic if the on-prem appliance can't accommodate a large amount of traffic but it's not available where we are."
"It is very difficult to implement. It should be made a bit easier to implement. There is also a lack of resources on the internet. They need to develop more resources."
"I would like for them to develop an advanced reporting feature."
"We currently do not use the solution's machine-learning-powered Zero-day Automated Protection because of an issue with it... We also use the aGalaxy platform, which is a management platform for the TPS devices. The issue is that some TPS features were added at the TPS level but weren't carried over to aGalaxy, and we manage all of our devices through aGalaxy. So we can't actually use some of the new features that are available on the TPS because that functionality doesn't exist in aGalaxy. That is one of my biggest complaints."
"The upgrade process for the boxes is not efficient. We have to go through the A10 aGalaxy where we have issues, like timeouts. They told me it was fixed in the latest version, but I tried to do it on the Portal and it is not working all the time."
"Some maintenance must be performed by our IT team."
"Its price could be improved. It is quite expensive. It will be good if we could export the configuration. Currently, to control the configuration, we need to go to each website, which is not very convenient."
"It's quite expensive."
"Incapsula services also provides load balancing services for their service IP address environment. So far, with monitoring their services, the IP address was only changed once."
"Imperva should have more points of presence in Africa."
"Imperva always needs to adjust to new versions of cyber attacks, it needs to be faster, improve the resiliency of the software of the solution."
"It would be beneficial to include vulnerability management in the solution, similar to what they have for their on-premise solution."
"I am not sure if this application has a policy where you can create your custom policy and run it as our firewall. We should have some ability to also create some custom policy, then run it as a firewall."
A10 Thunder TPS is ranked 15th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 12 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 6th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 74 reviews. A10 Thunder TPS is rated 8.8, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of A10 Thunder TPS writes "A highly stable solution that can be used for load balancing". 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". A10 Thunder TPS is most compared with Arbor DDoS, Cloudflare, Radware DefensePro, Corero and Azure DDoS Protection, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and AWS WAF. See our A10 Thunder TPS vs. Imperva DDoS report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.