We performed a comparison between F5 Advanced WAF and Imperva DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The best solution for WAF."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the WAF protection, Data Safe, and the seven-layer DDoS."
"The initial setup was was easy to install."
"The solution is stable."
"It also has antivirus and DDoS mitigation capabilities. We have enabled these features."
"There is no need to worry about updating signatures because WAF will automatically update the signatures for you."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the easy identification of events and customization. We can pinpoint our settings."
"It protects and mitigates damage in the network."
"Incapsula takes care of the CDN infrastructure and bandwidth volume, providing several enterprise "load balancing" features."
"We have peace of mind that nobody will use malware on us or try to hack our website."
"Imperva DDoS is fairly stable, and its availability is quite high."
"Simplifies putting everything in code."
"Real-time monitoring is also a great tool, as you may watch several parameters in real time."
"There is no need to have an appliance in house for the services because it is on the cloud."
"On the site security, I can see which countries have incidents, whether it was a robot attack, a real human user, or non-human user."
"It is a stable solution."
"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."
"Most customers encounter stability issues with the product's Big-IP logs."
"F5 Advanced WAF needs better integration within the application, like remote dashboards."
"You have to buy another module with an extra license, to have the authentication feature."
"F5 Advanced WAF could improve the precision of the scanning. There are many false positives. They should improve their threat database."
"I think the deployment templates can be better."
"The deployment side is quite complex."
"The solution could improve by having an independent capture module. It has a built feature that you can deploy the capture on your published website. However, it's not very user-friendly. When you compare this feature to Google Capture or other enterprise captures, they are very simple. It needs a good connection to the F5 Advanced WAF sandbox. When you implement this feature in the data center, you may suffer some complications with connecting to the F5 Advanced WAF sandbox. This should be improved in the future."
"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."
"A limited tool if you're looking to customize."
"It needs to be improved every time there are new attacks."
"The solution needs to improve Integration with third parties for their on-prem deployment models. The integration is not that good yet."
"It would be better if we were able to manage and apply changes to multiple websites/web applications, and search WAF logs for multiple websites, via the Incapsula dashboard."
"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."
"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."
F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 55 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 18th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 74 reviews. F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". 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". F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and AWS WAF. See our F5 Advanced WAF vs. Imperva DDoS report.
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.