We performed a comparison between Arbor DDoS and Imperva DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has an easy-to-understand GUI...Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"In the GUI, the packet capture is a very good option, as is the option to block an IP address."
"Analytics and its attack mitigation capabilities are valuable features of the solution."
"Using standard BGP, NetFlow and SNMP ensure wide compatibility. There are also peering traffic reports that can help identify upstream peering opportunities. The ATLAS aggregation service allows us to contribute to the global DDoS data and benefit from overall trends."
"The solution provides good protection against volumetric DDoS attacks."
"We also use it by serving our customers' cloud signaling services with on-premise APS devices."
"The quality of the technical support provided by Arbor DDoS is premium."
"Arbor has a global ranking in reliability and credibility. They are very unique and can respond to a very wide scope of threats from their global deployment."
"I like the user-friendly interface."
"Scalability is pretty easy on the base platform. You just add another, and you're ready to go."
"The dashboard is good and user-friendly."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is easy to configure."
"Setup was straightforward, very simple. I only entered the domain and Incapsula returned the DNS data that I needed to change for the protection to be configured."
"There are quite a few useful Imperva Incapsula features. For example, one of them is the reports. The graphics are very good and it's easy to configure. The whole process is very fast and reliable too. They have good tech support as well."
"Its unique interface for managing security performance and ease of use are the most valuable features of this solution."
"An improvement has been to our website: It increases the speed of our response, the capacity of the site, and optimizes the bandwidth."
"Arbor Pravail APS devices do not sync features or config the backup enough. This needs to be improved."
"The look and feel of the management console is a little old, excessively simple. If you compare it with other solutions, the look and feel of the console is like you're using technology from five or six years ago. It doesn't show all the technology that is actually behind it. It looks like an older solution, even though it is not."
"On the main page there are alerts that we are unable to clear, even though the issue has been resolved."
"For troubleshooting problems, it's not so intuitive. It's not straightforward. This is the core of their kernel, so they need to improve it a little bit... In F5 I have full control of everything."
"They should improve the reporting section and make it a little bit more detailed. I would like to have much better and more detailed reports."
"We need a SaaS model for the solution."
"There is definitely room for improvement in third-party intelligence and integrations."
"It is an expensive product, so there is room for improvement in terms of pricing."
"I would like to have support for SSL management and secure DNS."
"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."
"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."
"We would like them to hire people in Sweden because it's quite hard when people are sitting in the UK or Belgium because some of the customers really want them to be local."
"The cost could be lower; our end clients need to have a high budget to purchase this solution."
"It needs to be improved every time there are new attacks."
"A limited tool if you're looking to customize."
"Imperva should have more points of presence in Africa."
Arbor DDoS is ranked 2nd in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 46 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 6th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 74 reviews. Arbor DDoS is rated 8.6, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Arbor DDoS writes "A critical solution for security, as it includes features that can automatically detect and prevent DDoS attacks". 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". Arbor DDoS is most compared with Radware DefensePro, Cloudflare, Corero, Fortinet FortiDDoS and A10 Thunder TPS, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Radware DefensePro, AWS WAF and Imperva Web Application Firewall. See our Arbor DDoS vs. Imperva DDoS report.
See our list of best Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection vendors.
We monitor all Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection 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.