Compare Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. Imperva Incapsula

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. Imperva Incapsula and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
536,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"The most valuable feature is the DDoS protection, which is the main reason we got it.""The CDN and the WAF features are the best.""The solution can scale extremely well.""The features are powerful and better than F5.""I like that the charges are all based on usage and labor costs. For the time that we spend onboarding almost 252020 FQDN, Akamai charges us only for the traffic usage, but it's only charging us for the labor costs for onboarding."

More Akamai Kona Site Defender Pros »

"The solution has a very good interface.""It is an effective threat mitigation tool.""The technical support is excellent.""The most valuable features for us are the DDoS and Bot.""The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is easy to configure.""It blocks all types of attacks.""There is no need to have an appliance in house for the services because it is on the cloud.""Its unique interface for managing security performance and ease of use are the most valuable features of this solution."

More Imperva Incapsula Pros »

Cons
"The interface is a little bit clunky and can be improved.""Could integrate more features for each security.""The pricing could be reduced a bit.""Support and the pricing need to improve.""It would be better if there weren't any issues with latency. We had latency issues, but I think they are all solved now."

More Akamai Kona Site Defender Cons »

"The rules surrounding the making of web applications could be improved.""Imperva should have more points of presence in Africa.""I would like to have support for SSL management and secure DNS.""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.""It's quite expensive.""Certificate management could be improved.""The product could use a broader scope in the area of policies.""The weakest point of Imperva is their first level of support, which should be improved. They should also improve the access and security logs viewing directly on the portal. I would like to see better access and security logs through the portal and not only through a SIM solution. Currently, if you want to explore your access and security logs from Imperva, you need a SIM tool or a SIM infrastructure on your side to do it. You can't do it manually or directly through the portal, which is a big problem for us. I had a call yesterday with Imperva for the roadmap, and I just told them this. They agreed that this is an improvement point from their side."

More Imperva Incapsula Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"Akamai is very expensive.""There is no license at all for Akamai. They are going to charge us only for the usage."

More Akamai Kona Site Defender Pricing and Cost Advice »

"The cost is on par with other solutions such as Cloudflare and Akamai.""It is not expensive compared to the other similar solutions in this category.""It is a very expensive solution. The price is very high. A lot of customers tell us that they would love to use Imperva more. I have some customers who have 50 websites, but they have only 10 websites on Imperva because of the price. They would love to have all their websites running through Imperva, but they can't. They have to choose the more critical websites to protect because the price is very high. It is a very good product, but it is too expensive. If you buy a plan for 20 megabytes and you don't consume all of your 20 megabytes, it is okay, but if you consume more, you are charged for the superior traffic.""The cost is somewhere around $10,000 a site. For every site, you pay individually. For every DNS entry, you have you pay.""It is expensive."

More Imperva Incapsula Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
536,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: The solution can scale extremely well.
Top Answer: The product really isn't very user-friendly. They could improve it so that it's easier for their customers to navigate and use. From a management perspective, it's difficult. Managing these rules with… more »
Top Answer: We primarily use the solution as an application firewall.
Top Answer: 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.
Top Answer: 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… more »
Ranking
Views
8,745
Comparisons
6,883
Reviews
5
Average Words per Review
396
Rating
8.2
Views
12,919
Comparisons
9,178
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
581
Rating
8.4
Comparisons
Also Known As
Kona Site Defender, Kona
Incapsula
Learn More
Overview
Akamai's Kona Site Defender extends security beyond the data center while maintaining site performance and availability in the face of fast-changing threats. It leverages the power of the Akamai Intelligent Platform to detect, identify and mitigate Denial-of-Service (DoS) and Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks before they ever reach the origin.

Imperva Incapsula is a cloud-based application delivery service that protects websites and safeguards web applications and their data from attacks, and improves their performance by enhancing user experience. Incapsula includes a security platform with a web application firewall, DDoS mitigation, content delivery network, and global load balancer to maximize performance.

Offer
Learn more about Akamai Kona Site Defender
Learn more about Imperva Incapsula
Sample Customers
AvidMobile, itBit
Hitachi, BNZ, Bitstamp, Moz, InnoGames, BTCChina, Wix, LivePerson, Zillow and more.
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company30%
Financial Services Firm14%
Comms Service Provider14%
Media Company5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm15%
Non Tech Company12%
Marketing Services Firm9%
Insurance Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company29%
Comms Service Provider23%
Financial Services Firm7%
Media Company6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business33%
Large Enterprise67%
REVIEWERS
Small Business45%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise42%
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. Imperva Incapsula and other solutions. Updated: September 2021.
536,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Akamai Kona Site Defender is ranked 9th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 5 reviews while Imperva Incapsula is ranked 5th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews. Akamai Kona Site Defender is rated 8.2, while Imperva Incapsula is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Akamai Kona Site Defender writes "Great technical support, scales extremely well, and is very stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Incapsula writes "There is not too much to know but that it is one of the best products of this type that you can get". Akamai Kona Site Defender is most compared with Akamai Prolexic Routed, AWS WAF, F5 Shape Security, Cloudflare and Imperva Web Application Firewall, whereas Imperva Incapsula is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Imperva Web Application Firewall, AWS WAF and Imperva SecureSphere Database Security. See our Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. Imperva Incapsula 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.