We performed a comparison between Comodo cWatch and Imperva Web Application Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."The FIM feature, the information in the new management system, and their support are the most valuable features. The scanned results are quite fast as compared to other platforms compared to scanning timing. It takes about a minute or two minutes. Also, the results of the Comodo scan results are in detail."
"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
"I have had a positive experience with Imperva Web Application Firewall's tech support so far. They are knowledgeable and respond on time."
"The solution has been quite stable. I have not seen any bugs at all."
"The solution is scalable."
"Very intuitive and granular configuration - It does not require much time, or advanced knowledge, for configuration and maintenance."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are performance and flexibility. We can extend or customize the box itself."
"The dynamic profiling of websites is the solution's most valuable feature. The security is also good."
"It mitigates all of the availabilities of risks around web applications."
"The tool's profiling feature maps all the web application directories and related components on the profile directory. It has improved the security of my client's website applications."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
"The tool needs to improve CPU and storage memory."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"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 would like to improve the tool's turnaround time in terms of support."
"The tool's UI is complicated. It would be best to have a more accessible UI dashboard to make the job easier."
"It's a complicated tool to keep."
"The initial setup could be simplified. Every time you have to install the solution you have to get in touch with support or somebody that can to do that for you."
"I'd like the option to pick your bot protection."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Comodo cWatch is ranked 35th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 45 reviews. Comodo cWatch is rated 9.6, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Comodo cWatch writes "Excellent security, good encryption, and pretty stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". Comodo cWatch is most compared with Cloudflare, Atomic ModSecurity Rules, Sucuri and AWS WAF, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Azure Front Door.
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.
