We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) 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."Valuable features include simple and centralized management of user access and capabilities, as well as Web 2.0 interactive attack alerting, traffic visualization, and mitigation service control."
"The most valuable features include the traffic categorization and control of the traffic. The filtering of the traffic is very precise. When you want to stop some traffic, you precisely stop that traffic."
"The product allows us to check real-time progress, including latency and network activities."
"It is fully mitigating the attacks. We've dealt with other ones where we didn't necessarily see that. The detection is very good. It's also very simple to use. Arbor is a single pane of glass, whereas with other solutions you might have a detection pane of glass and then have to go to a separate interface to deal with the mitigation. That single pane of glass makes it much simpler."
"The most valuable feature is mitigation, which can blackhole the IP."
"Its scalability is big. It is for large deployments of big organizations and service providers."
"Arbor DDoS is easy to use, provides effective blocking of DDoS attacks, and can be used for DNS, web, and main servers. Additionally, this solution is far easier to operate than others solutions, such as Fortinet DDoS."
"We also use it by serving our customers' cloud signaling services with on-premise APS devices."
"It is stable."
"We use three main features. The first one is access control. The second feature we use is called IP intelligence. Finally, we have a DDoS safety feature."
"I find the signature base is very helpful to see traffic"
"CGNAT is one of its strong areas."
"The most valuable features of F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) are the web gateway, load balancing, services, and applications available."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that the blocking of IP's."
"The protection is very useful."
"It blocks various attacks and mitigates disasters from occurring."
"I think the diversity of protection is extremely limited. It must be expanded in future upgrades and versions."
"On the main page there are alerts that we are unable to clear, even though the issue has been resolved."
"On the application layer, they could have a better distributed traffic flow. They could improve that a bit. For network data it is very effective, but the application layer can be improved."
"There is some room for AI to take place."
"The look and feel of the management console is a little old, excessively simple. If you compare it with other solutions, the look and feel of the console is like you're using technology from five or six years ago. It doesn't show all the technology that is actually behind it. It looks like an older solution, even though it is not."
"If we want to see live traffic, we can see do so. But once an attack that lasts for five minutes is done, the data is no longer there. It would be an improvement if we could see recent traffic in the dashboard. We can check and download live traffic, but a past attack, with all the details, such as why it happened and how to mitigate and prevent such future attacks, would be helpful to see."
"We need a SaaS model for the solution."
"Because we had some routers that were somewhat old, they were not integrated with Arbor. They did not support the NetFlow version that Arbor was running. That was a challenge. We had to upgrade the routers. Some backward-compatibility would be helpful."
"F5 could provide a distributed cloud version."
"Currently, we have eighty F5s and we need some kind of management software. It would be very helpful."
"The pricing of the solution could be a little bit better."
"The solution’s initial setup is not easy."
"There should be simplified and better integration with BIG-IQ."
"We needed to protect the database but the solution didn't offer a certain feature to do so."
"The solution's UI could be improved."
"We would have preferred to have support when we first started"
More F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) is ranked 7th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 21 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) writes "Straightforward setup with very good granularity and performance". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Imperva DDoS, Corero and Akamai App and API Protector, whereas F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) is most compared with AWS Shield and Radware DefensePro. See our Arbor DDoS vs. F5 BIG-IP Advanced Firewall Manager (AFM) 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.