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

F5 Advanced WAF vs Oracle Dyn Web Application Security 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

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
Oracle Dyn Web Application ...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
48th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (35th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of F5 Advanced WAF is 3.9%, down from 8.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Dyn Web Application Security is 0.6%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 Advanced WAF3.9%
Oracle Dyn Web Application Security0.6%
Other95.5%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
KA
Commercial Manager at Natco Information technology
Very secure with an easy initial setup and pretty stable
We are using the latest version of the solution. We sell this solution for financial systems. We're Oracle partners and service providers. We'll present this solution to our clients and give them a benefit analysis of the product so they can see the reasons why they need the solution or why it might help them. I'd rate this solution nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"WAF functionality is valuable for protecting applications from attacks."
"The product is very stable; it is a PCI company, so there are 10,000-12,000 people using the solution, and all of the internet payments are behind the ASM for the F5."
"The solution uses AI to protect against botnet attacks."
"The ROI is very impressive as it is crucial for financial applications to be protected efficiently."
"The most valuable features of F5 Advanced WAF are SSL uploading, signature, and anomaly detection, and it is overall a high-quality solution."
"The web application firewall itself is most valuable. It provides positive security and negative security. In negative security, it blocks a task such as cross-site scripting, code injection, etc. In positive security, it lets you specify and enforce things, such as the parameters allowed in username and password fields and the number of characters allowed in a field."
"The initial setup was was easy to install."
"It ensures compliance with security standards by providing features like PCI DSS checks."
"Oracle security is excellent for our banking organizations in terms of the security offered."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
 

Cons

"It's sometimes difficult to customize APIs with F5 Advanced WAF, which could be made easier."
"F5 Advanced needs to improve its bot protection. The solution needs to have machine learning to learn the behavior of the customer to recognize the human versus the bot. This is a difficult feature to explain to our customers. I would like documentation about the bot feature to make it easier for the customer to understand."
"The reporting could be clearer and embedded to include our movement data."
"You have to buy another module with an extra license, to have the authentication feature."
"The solution is very expensive so should only be used in the right environment."
"I would like for there to be a cloud-based solution, this would also help to improve scalability."
"My advice to future customers of F5 Advanced WAF or to people thinking of using it is that there is a much better product in the market."
"I would like to see improved features in the F5 Advanced WAF solution, especially with a focus on enabling Kubernetes fully."
"Technical support could be improved overall."
"The solution should have a Data Mask for the next release. It would be helpful for banking institutions as they would be able to hide the server number of the ATM machine in the CPU."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate F5 Advanced WAF's pricing a three out of ten."
"F5 Advanced WAF is not a cost-effective solution. Although they are attempting to reduce prices with their VE and cloud options, they are more expensive than other solutions. The solution is more expensive on average."
"The pricing is too high."
"It is a little bit costly, but it has all the features that are required."
"After buying the program, you just pay for the support every year."
"Its price is fair. We have done a couple of deals where they were able to give some kind of discount to the customers. The price was initially high for the customers, but after a couple of negotiations, it came within their budget. They were happy with that."
"I think the price is very high."
"I don't have any issue with the pricing of this solution."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
911,436 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Dyn Web Application Security, Zenedge
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bank
FoodStorm, Soccer Shots
Find out what your peers are saying about Imperva, Fortinet, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: August 2026.
911,436 professionals have used our research since 2012.