We performed a comparison between Akamai Kona Site Defender and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall 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 most valuable feature is the custom rules feature. This is because many of our customers require a lot of custom rules. Because it's a very customized project for our customers, I think they have the best of everything already."
"I like that the charges are all based on usage and labor costs. For the time that we spend onboarding almost 252020 FQDN, Akamai charges us only for the traffic usage, but it's only charging us for the labor costs for onboarding."
"The features are powerful and better than F5."
"I can attest to its benefits in terms of understanding and mitigating threats...The solution's technical support team seems to be pretty responsive."
"Technical support has a very fast response time and they are helpful."
"We like that there's load balancing, firewall capabilities, DDoS protection, et cetera, all covered by Cloudflare."
"The Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's most valuable feature is its ease of configuration."
"Does a good job preventing web application attacks."
"Someone with a basic understanding of networking and security will be able to implement the firewall's basic features within 15 minutes."
"Support and the pricing need to improve."
"Akamai needs to focus on quickly responding to risks, even those that may potentially be of zero threat..Maybe some of the documentation is a little confusing. They have a lot of different places where you can go to get information, and some of the information is quite out of date."
"It would be better if there weren't any issues with latency. We had latency issues, but I think they are all solved now."
"They are already very flexible, but room for improvement is there. Reports generation could be better and should be improved."
"They have some limitations with third-party integrations."
"The accuracy of the Cloudflare Web Application Firewall could be improved by reducing the number of false-negative alerts."
"It would be ideal if the solution offered better log integration and more integration with different platforms."
"I have experienced some difficulties with Cloudflare's support as a customer based in India."
"The reporting could be more granular."
More Cloudflare Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Akamai Kona Site Defender is ranked 13th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 4 reviews while Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is ranked 14th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 5 reviews. Akamai Kona Site Defender is rated 8.4, while Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Akamai Kona Site Defender writes "A tool helpful for mitigating cyber threats while providing excellent technical support to its users ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall writes "Competitively priced with good support and very good reliability". Akamai Kona Site Defender is most compared with AWS WAF, Akamai Prolexic Routed, Akamai Web Application Protector, Cloudflare and Imperva Web Application Firewall, whereas Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Azure Front Door, Fortinet FortiWeb and Fastly. See our Akamai Kona Site Defender vs. Cloudflare Web Application Firewall 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.
