Compare F5 Advanced WAF vs. NGINX Web Application Firewall

F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 10 reviews while NGINX Web Application Firewall is ranked 16th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 3 reviews. F5 Advanced WAF is rated 9.2, while NGINX Web Application Firewall is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Provides load-balancing and security for our enterprise-level clients". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX Web Application Firewall writes "A stable system with good security and load balancing". F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Citrix NetScaler AppFirewall and Fortinet FortiWeb, whereas NGINX Web Application Firewall is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF and Fortinet FortiWeb. See our F5 Advanced WAF vs. NGINX Web Application Firewall report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 Advanced WAF vs. NGINX Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
406,607 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
This solution is an enterprise-class firewall that provides both load-balancing and security.The anti-bot protection is the solution's most valuable feature. Safe-guard or credential staffing are also useful features.This solution inspects your traffic and based on that, automatically create distinct qualities for you, so you can add this to the policy already created. That's what I like most.The solution isn't too expensive. The license allows you to license what you need and leave out what you don't need.I definitely recommend this solution because of the time you save on analysis.The best solution for WAF.With F5 Advanced WAF, it was protection for online publications and for our customers that caused us to choose the platform.The most valuable feature is artificial intelligence and to get extra internal access.

Read more »

The most valuable feature is that there is a link in the system that will help to analyze the security of an application when something abnormal is found.The most valuable feature is that I can establish different services from the firewall.It is a very good tool for load balancing.

Read more »

Cons
This solution can be made more user-friendly.The solution's dashboard could be improved. When you're moving from policy to policy, the logs and the integration of the logs in other systems aren't straightforward.I would not expect traffic details to pass through the web application firewall across the length of the whole application. I think that there is a web application where it can let the application function without traffic going in into the WAF.The solution is tedious. It takes a lot of discrete settings so one needs to get detailed and granular when they use the solution. It takes you a whole lot of energy and concentration to configure. It needs to be much more straight-forward, like other web solutions.One thing that can be improved, is to increase the quantity over predefine policy.I think the deployment templates can be better.F5 Advanced WAF needs better integration within the application, like remote dashboards.The administrator's user interface and some of the settings can sometimes be very complicated to understand.

Read more »

Setting policies and parameters through the UI should be more automated because the process is manual, where we can only edit one rule at a time.The configuration needs to be more flexible because it is difficult to do things that are outside of the ordinary.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Licensing fees for this solution are paid on a yearly basis.After buying the program, you just pay for the support every year.I think the price is very high.The pricing is too high.

Read more »

The licensing fees for this solution are pretty expensive for what it does, but there is no alternative.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
406,607 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
972
Comparisons
596
Reviews
9
Average Words per Review
441
Avg. Rating
9.1
Views
1,209
Comparisons
960
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
467
Avg. Rating
8.0
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
NGINX WAF
Learn
F5
F5
Video Not Available
Overview

At F5, we give our customers the freedom to securely deliver every app, anywhere—with confidence. All F5 products are highly programmable and integrate into any environment, whether on premises or in any cloud. To date, 48 of the Fortune 50 companies rely on F5 to deliver apps that customers and employees can securely access at any time, on any device, from any location.

Even when you understand security, it is difficult to create secure applications, especially when working under the pressures so common in today’s enterprise. The NGINX Web Application Firewall (WAF) protects applications against sophisticated Layer 7 attacks that might otherwise lead to systems being taken over by attackers, loss of sensitive data, and downtime. The NGINX WAF is based on the widely used ModSecurity open source software.

Offer
Learn more about F5 Advanced WAF
Learn more about NGINX Web Application Firewall
Sample Customers
MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bankm.a.x IT
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company26%
Comms Service Provider14%
K 12 Educational Company Or School11%
Energy/Utilities Company9%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 Advanced WAF vs. NGINX Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
406,607 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.