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

AWS WAF vs Kemp LoadMaster comparison

 

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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
5.7
AWS WAF offers cost-effective security by reducing the need for extra staff and effectively blocking threats.
Sentiment score
7.4
Kemp LoadMaster is a cost-effective solution that enhances efficiency, security, and offers significant returns quickly in various industries.
With AWS WAF, it is easier for us to block unwanted malicious DDoS attacks and threats from coming into our web application.
Dev Ops Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.6
AWS WAF support is prompt and knowledgeable, but experiences vary in resolution speed and service costs.
Sentiment score
8.8
Kemp LoadMaster support is highly rated for its knowledgeable, efficient team offering quick issue resolution and comprehensive online resources.
Resolving issues can take time because the support personnel may lack product expertise, leading to delays.
Security Engineer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
They reach out when you send them a ticket, and within 24 hours or less, someone is able to get back to you to solve your problem.
Dev Ops Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
We have not received technical support from Kemp LoadMaster without a license.
Information Security Engineer at BOK
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
AWS WAF is highly scalable, versatile for various infrastructures, but some users desire expanded features for broader adaptability.
Sentiment score
8.2
Kemp LoadMaster is highly scalable, supporting smooth upgrades and adaptable licensing for both small and large enterprises.
AWS WAF does scale in the sense that it is fully managed and has automatic scaling.
Dev Ops Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Kemp LoadMaster is a scalable solution.
Information Security Engineer at BOK
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
AWS WAF is stable, effectively blocking threats, with minor issues in custom rules, and continuous improvements enhance reliability.
Sentiment score
8.7
Kemp LoadMaster is praised for its stability, reliability, high availability, and effective server load management with minimal downtime.
Since it protects web applications from common attacks such as SQL injection and XSS, it is very stable.
Dev Ops Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
In terms of reliability, I would rate AWS WAF about six out of ten due to the need for improved signature sets.
Security Engineer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
We faced issues with AWS WAF when writing the custom rules.
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
With the license purchase afterwards, if it expires, it begins dropping the HTTP traffic, also the DNS traffic.
Information Security Engineer at BOK
 

Room For Improvement

AWS WAF requires enhanced features, security, user interface, documentation, seamless integrations, and added automation for improved effectiveness.
Kemp LoadMaster needs UI, security, documentation enhancements, improved monitoring, automation, analytics, and better cloud integration.
Compared to firewalls, WAFs generally provide limited stateful analysis capabilities.
Security Engineer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
The way we see it now is just mentioned as a percentage from bots and actual users, which should include proper graphs and detailed information.
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
The level of granularity is not great, and as you cross a certain threshold, the cost goes up by twenty or thirty percent every time.
Security Engineer Dev Sec Ops at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
After that, they said if it was good, we could purchase the license, and while we found it very good, the license cost was too high.
Information Security Engineer at BOK
 

Setup Cost

AWS WAF pricing is seen as affordable but can be costly in high-demand scenarios like DDoS attacks.
Kemp LoadMaster offers flexible, cost-effective licensing and setup with positive user feedback and a 30-day free trial.
Due to our status as an AWS shop, AWS WAF is cost-effective for us, and we benefit from discounts due to our extensive use of AWS services.
Security Engineer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
The licensing cost for AWS WAF is just pay-as-you-go; it is a service-based model.
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
 

Valuable Features

AWS WAF enhances security with configurable rules, seamless AWS integration, scalability, and ease of deployment for threat protection.
Kemp LoadMaster offers ease of use, security features, Azure integration, and cost-effective load balancing for Microsoft applications.
The biggest benefit of AWS WAF for us is to filter malicious requests, so we can protect our environment and application from malicious actors.
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
It has also helped to improve the posture of our application, prevent all DDoS attacks, and unnecessary traffic and SQL injection that is reducing the performance of our application.
Dev Ops Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
The specific outcomes showing how AWS WAF has helped our organization include improving our security posture by reducing the attack surface and reducing malicious attacks.
Senior Cloud Security at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
We had some issues in patching management, so we deployed this product for virtual patching, the IPS rule, and it gives us very good results because we have very critical servers.
Information Security Engineer at BOK
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Kemp LoadMaster
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
27th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (13th), Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (17th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of AWS WAF is 4.2%, down from 7.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kemp LoadMaster is 1.3%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AWS WAF4.2%
Kemp LoadMaster1.3%
Other94.5%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Azam S M - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
Has successfully filtered malicious traffic and allowed country-specific access controls
For improvement in AWS WAF, we can have better monitoring. One of the things that should be improved in AWS WAF is the monitoring; we need to identify the requests and where they are coming from. If it's a bot, we should differentiate the requests, whether they are automated or not. The way we see it now is just mentioned as a percentage from bots and actual users, which should include proper graphs and detailed information. We also need a feature where we can filter specific requests. If there are scripts in the requests, we should be able to filter those requests to see if there are any scripts running from them.
IshtiaqKhalil - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Engineer at BOK
Displays flexible, user-friendly interface with minor licensing challenges
The product could be improved with a more intuitive interface for complex configurations and more advanced analytics. Additionally, enhanced security features, like a more robust Web Application Firewall, and stronger APIs for better automation would be beneficial. Overall, the main areas for improvement are in strengthening the advanced features to better meet the demands of large-scale enterprise environments. key features for the next release should focus on three areas. First, an enhanced, next-generation security suite with a more powerful Web Application Firewall (WAF) and integrated bot protection. Second, more advanced and customizable analytics dashboards to provide deeper insights into application performance. Finally, greater support for modern, cloud-native environments, including better APIs for automation and seamless hybrid-cloud traffic management
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Construction Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise28
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business24
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise16
 

Questions from the Community

What are the limitations of AWS WAF vs alternative WAFs?
Hi Varun, I have had experienced with several WAF deployments and deep technical assessments of the following: 1. Imperva WAF 2. F5 WAF 3. Polarisec Cloud WAF Typical limitations on cloud WAF is t...
How does AWS WAF compare to Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS WAF?
AWS WAF is affordable; it depends on the number of rules you apply. The licensing cost for AWS WAF is just pay-as-you-go; it is a service-based model.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kemp LoadMaster?
My primary advice is to carefully analyze your total cost of ownership (TCO) rather than just the initial purchase price. Kemp LoadMaster is highly competitive on price and often provides a much be...
What needs improvement with Kemp LoadMaster?
The product could be improved with a more intuitive interface for complex configurations and more advanced analytics. Additionally, enhanced security features, like a more robust Web Application Fi...
What is your primary use case for Kemp LoadMaster?
Our primary use case was traffic load balancing and distribution. The solution was essential for managing all inbound client traffic, including HTTPS and DNS requests, by routing it through our fir...
 

Also Known As

AWS Web Application Firewall
LoadMaster Load Balancer
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
Kent County Council, KEMP, SMA Solar Technology AG, RT€ Player , Victrix (Quebec, Canada), Texas A&M, Macmillan Cancer Support, Cisco, Austin Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS WAF vs. Kemp LoadMaster and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.