Azure Front Door vs Imperva Web Application Firewall comparison


Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Categories and Ranking

Azure Front Door
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
Average Rating
Number of Reviews
Ranking in other categories
CDN (3rd), Microsoft Security Suite (15th)
Imperva Web Application Fir...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
Average Rating
Number of Reviews
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Azure Front Door is 3.8%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Imperva Web Application Firewall is 7.0%, down from 7.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
Unique Categories:
Microsoft Security Suite
No other categories found

Featured Reviews

Nov 28, 2023
The product provides excellent documentation and easy-to-use features, and it enables organizations to set up content security policies
Our website is built through a Gatsby process and generic static files. All the static content for the site gets hosted in the CDN. We use Azure Front Door as an entry point for it The solution has improved our organization by allowing us to utilize the Rules Engine feature. Rules Engine is a…
RullySaputra - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 22, 2024
Offers good reporting templates and easy to set it up
I handled web application and database monitoring, including some DDoS work. I implemented Imperva for a top-five bank in Indonesia, monitoring their service and database activity Firstly, Imperva monitors all traffic, even customer access, to the web application. Then, Imperva uses features like…

Quotes from Members

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


"You can assign as many web application firewall policies as you want to the same instance of Front Door."
"The price is one of the most important aspects of the product. It's quite affordable."
"The web application firewall is a great feature."
"Has a great application firewall and we like the security."
"I particularly appreciate its load-balancing capabilities as it allows us to manage multiple instances and support a global presence effectively."
"It inspects the traffic at the network level before it comes into Azure. We can do SSL offloading, and it can detect abnormalities before the traffic comes into the application. It can be used globally and is easy to set up. It is also quite stable and scalable."
"The solution is good."
"The most valuable feature is that you can implement resources globally. It does not depend on location and ability or something like that. This is to connect clients around the world."
"There are a number of features that are valuable such as the account takeover and various antivirus features."
"The most important feature I have found to be the ease in how to do the backup and restores."
"Learning mode and custom policies are helpful features."
"The solution is scalable."
"The tool's profiling feature maps all the web application directories and related components on the profile directory. It has improved the security of my client's website applications."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are DDoS, malware, and the other malicious threat prevention it provides. Additionally, third-party integration is available. You can forward the log for further analysis."
"Imperva WAF's strongest features are the detection of web application threats and vulnerabilities in the source code."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is stable."


"This is a relatively expensive solution."
"I'm responsible for the governance and cost control of Azure. I'm not a specialist in any products and therefore I couldn't really speak effectively to features that are lacking or missing."
"There is room for improvement and they're working on it."
"The user interface needs improvement as it is difficult to create the mapping to link the problem with your private address sources."
"We should be able to use Front Door defenders with multiple cloud vendors. Currently, they can be used only with the Azure cloud. Azure Front Door should also be able to do global load balancing and provide internal front door services. Microsoft should clearly define what Traffic Manager, Application Gateway, and Azure Front Door products do. These are similar products, and people get confused between these products."
"It lacks sufficient functionality."
"The product's features are limited compared to Cloudflare. The tool also doesn't work well in a hybrid environment. I would like to see a way to add personalized APIs in the system."
"The product needs to improve its latency."
"Their portal is very limited and needs improvement."
"I would like the solution to improve its support response time."
"The support for the on-premises version needs improvement."
"They recently separated the WAF and the DAM management gateways in order for each of these to be managed from different areas, so I believe it now requires additional investments for what was previously a single complete solution."
"One potential improvement for Imperva is enhancing its alert system."
"The tool needs to improve CPU and storage memory."
"The initial setup could be simplified. Every time you have to install the solution you have to get in touch with support or somebody that can to do that for you."
"An improvement for Imperva WAF would be to reduce the number of false positives and create more strong use cases based on AI/ML or behavioral analytics."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is on a pay-as-you-go basis."
"The pricing of the solution is good."
"The transition to the premium tier has led to increased costs, making it more expensive than the classic tier."
"The solution is a bit expensive."
"The product is expensive."
"The price of Imperva Web Application Firewalls is expensive compared to others."
"Imperva’s pricing is a bit higher in the market since it offers a full-blown WAF."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is expensive."
"It is very costly, but the return on investment is very high. Its cost was around $70,000, and we got it back in just six months."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall price is higher compared to other solutions. However, everything is included in the price."
"The pricing is somewhat expensive. It is actually a huge investment when compared to other countries."
"The solution's pricing is an issue."
"Licensing can range from one to twenty thousand dollars annually. Additionally, some features, including software support, require an annual subscription as well."
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
789,674 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
Financial Services Firm
Manufacturing Company
Financial Services Firm
Computer Software Company
Manufacturing Company
Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business

Questions from the Community

What's the difference between Azure Front Door and Application Gateway?
We found Azure Front Door to be easily scaled and very stable. The implementation is very fast and Microsoft provides excellent support. Azure Front Door can quickly detect abnormalities before the...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Front Door?
The transition to the premium tier has led to increased costs, making it more expensive than the classic tier. However, we acknowledge that this pricing reflects additional features and capabilities.
Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
For ADC, any ADC can do a good job. But in case if you want to add WAF functionality to the same ADC hardware you have to look for other ADC's like F5, Imperva, Radware, Fortinet, etc.
DDoS solutions: Any other solutions to consider aside from Radware DefensePro and F5 Silverline DDoS Protection?
You can have a look to Imperva Cloud WAF, the anti-DDoS mitigation is under 1s and works very well. I observed a lot of DDoS attacks that were well managed (even not seen by the customer) by Imperv...

Also Known As

Azure Front-Door
No data available

Learn More




Sample Customers

Information Not Available
BlueCross BlueShield, eHarmony, EMF Broadcasting, GE Healthcare, Metro Bank, The Motley Fool, Siemens
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Front Door vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: June 2024.
789,674 professionals have used our research since 2012.