We compared Imperva DDoS and Imperva Web Application Firewall based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Imperva DDoS seems to be the superior solution. Our reviewers feel that because Imperva Web Application Firewall can be difficult to use, Imperva DDoS is a better investment.
"It fits our requirements, as well as our budget."
"The three-second service level agreement is already better than the competition."
"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."
"The most valuable features are DDoS protection."
"Integration with IBM AS/400 and Db2 is okay."
"DDoS protection and WAF are the most valuable features. It is easy to deploy a service. It is easy and quick to deploy to a new website."
"The solution is very good at intercepting traffic before it gets to our data centers."
"Imperva Incapsula has many valuable features. One, it protects the top 10 OWAS vulnerability, the open web application software platform, this is standard. Secondly, it protects against broken authentication. As well, it has remote execution of code."
"Very scalable and very stable firewall for web applications, with a good interface in its cloud version. Mitigation is its most valuable feature. The technical support for this product is also good."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is a highly stable solution and is very mature."
"The solution integrates seamlessly with other tools and has a good alert mechanism."
"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."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are performance and flexibility. We can extend or customize the box itself."
"The configurability of the tools and the ease of operation to be the most valuable feature of Imperva."
"The solution has been quite stable. I have not seen any bugs at all."
"It has fewer false positives"
"A limited tool if you're looking to customize."
"I would like to see automated reporting to improve visibility."
"Users would benefit from better documentation. There is official documentation, but sometimes we need more detail. We have some use cases that are not so run of the mill. It would be great if there was a knowledge base that we could go to for more answers."
"The cost could be lower; our end clients need to have a high budget to purchase this solution."
"It would be beneficial to include vulnerability management in the solution, similar to what they have for their on-premise solution."
"Imperva always needs to adjust to new versions of cyber attacks, it needs to be faster, improve the resiliency of the software of the solution."
"Its price could be improved. It is quite expensive. It will be good if we could export the configuration. Currently, to control the configuration, we need to go to each website, which is not very convenient."
"We had an issue when securing the web applications for DDoS protection."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is very expensive."
"I loved the approach of the cloud. The cloud has a lot of new features, like advanced web protection and DDoS protection. If those could also be on-boarded onto the on-prem versions, that would be ideal. They need to pay attention to both deployment options and not just favor one."
"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."
"Sometimes our web application firewall will slow down."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"I'd like the option to pick your bot protection."
"It should be more user-friendly. Like other web solutions, it would be helpful to be able to easily do policy configuration and identification inside the application. Understanding the in-depth configuration of a policy is somewhat difficult for an engineer, and they can improve that."
"It would be nice to have more security control over mobile applications so I would suggest adding more mobile security features. It would also be beneficial to see improvements in regards to interface bandwidth performance, CPU time, and RAM size. Learning capability of the device is quite weak."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Imperva DDoS is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 13 reviews while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 7th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 17 reviews. Imperva DDoS is rated 8.6, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Imperva DDoS writes "Reliable with an impressive three-second SLA and reasonable pricing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Simple to maintain, easy to configure, and easy to scale". Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, AWS WAF, Arbor DDoS and Fortinet FortiWeb, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Akamai Kona Site Defender. See our Imperva DDoS vs. Imperva 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.
