No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Airlock vs F5 Advanced WAF comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Airlock
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
40th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
9.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
F5 Advanced WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
72
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Airlock is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 Advanced WAF is 3.6%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 Advanced WAF3.6%
Airlock0.8%
Other95.6%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Tiodor Jovovic - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Business Officer at Sky Express
Provides endless features and can be adapted to every single application that exists in the world
WAF is the most beneficial feature for security posture. Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product. The level of detail of the configuration is the most significant aspect. We can adapt it to every single application that exists in the world. The product helps with the compliance processes.
reviewer2797602 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Security Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Granular security policies have protected critical applications and ensure safe user and admin access
Improvements could be made regarding the log information from the backend CLI. There are enhancements needed; if a request gets blocked on the TCP layer, there should be traces or data to verify which source generated these requests, including the source and port information for initiation. These data are missing from F5 Advanced WAF. Besides that, another improvement could be refining the bot detection to minimize false positives; it should be able to verify more granularly between legitimate and non-legitimate clients. Overall, I find everything else good. A wish list feature I have is for the Technical Assistance Center (TAC) to respond more promptly. Their response time needs improvement; while they do not take excessive time, it can be enhanced, especially given it is a security product.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product."
"The technical support is perfect."
"I like the security features, especially against SQL injection."
"It's flexible and powerful, and the users can input their own rules to the system."
"F5's user-friendly interface and seamless integration stand out as the most valuable features for us."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are the overall capabilities, there is not a comparable solution on the market."
"In this case, we used a few long-term models because F5 Advanced WAF is a complete solution."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are SSL uploading, signature, and anomaly detection, and it is overall a high-quality solution."
"What a WAF is happens to be exactly what we are using F5 WAF for: a firewall for our web applications."
 

Cons

"The tool must be simplified."
"Compatibility with multiple cloud environments needs improvement. Both stability and scalability need to be improved."
"For F5 Advanced WAF, it's only 70% different over time with upgrades. F5 can still build AWS support after many long years of absence."
"I think the price is very high. This is what I hear from the customers."
"The reporting could be clearer and embedded to include our movement data."
"The user interface (UI) seems a bit outdated. Making it more user-friendly would be beneficial."
"This solution can be made more user-friendly."
"The GUI interface can be confusing due to similar-looking tabs for policy building, traffic learning, and event logs."
"One of our customers is a bit unhappy about the reporting options."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is cheap."
"I rate F5 Advanced WAF's pricing a three out of ten."
"Pricing for this solution is higher than average."
"The solution is very expensive so should only be used in the right environment."
"There is a perpetual license that comes with your hardware. There is also an additional fee for support."
"I am not sure about pricing but licenses are available on Google."
"There are various plans available for Fortinet FortiWeb Cloud WAF as a Service, including a trial version."
"It's more expensive than other solutions and depending on the modules, there can be additional fees."
"A yearly license for F5 Advanced WAF is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
10%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise31
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 Advanced WAF?
F5 Advanced WAF is somewhat costly compared to other vendors, but it is worth the investment due to the stability it provides to the environment and infrastructure.
What needs improvement with F5 Advanced WAF?
Improvements could be made regarding the log information from the backend CLI. There are enhancements needed; if a request gets blocked on the TCP layer, there should be traces or data to verify wh...
What is your primary use case for F5 Advanced WAF?
My main use case for F5 Advanced WAF is to protect external and internal applications from cyber attacks and to prevent malicious payloads and malicious data from reaching servers. Even if maliciou...
 

Also Known As

Airlock Suite
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Raiffeisen, SGKB, Generali, Visana
MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Imperva, Radware, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.