We performed a comparison between Imperva DDoS and Nexusguard DDoS Protection 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."They're quite easy to install and quite easy to set up. Clients really like that. Especially when you're dealing with the cloud, it's really easy."
"Simplifies putting everything in code."
"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."
"On the real time, you can see live traffic, which is flowing into our website."
"Scalability is pretty easy on the base platform. You just add another, and you're ready to go."
"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."
"On the activity log, I can see the exact details, the visit, and the threat."
"Cloud Diversion is another good feature packaged with the whole solution. When attack traffic is detected, Cloud Diversion triggers to automatically route our prefix to Nexusguard’s scrubbing center, ensuring that all attack traffic is dropped in the shortest time possible."
"Based on the support received for implementation, I rate the solution's technical support a nine out of ten."
"The support team was helpful."
"The managed service allows us to confidently rely on Nexusguard’s professional team to take relevant actions as and when required to make sure DDoS attacks are successfully mitigated, ensuring 100% uptime of our service."
"Filters can be customized depending on the characteristics of the attack traffic. This feature has made it easier for Nexusguard's SOC team to further isolate any specific attack that can't be blocked by pre-configured mitigation."
"We had an issue when securing the web applications for DDoS protection."
"There’s nothing that’s missing in terms of features."
"Analytics in the area of risk need to be improved to supply more information to the users for creating better environments."
"It needs to be improved every time there are new attacks."
"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 weakest point of Imperva is their first level of support, which should be improved. They should also improve the access and security logs viewing directly on the portal. I would like to see better access and security logs through the portal and not only through a SIM solution. Currently, if you want to explore your access and security logs from Imperva, you need a SIM tool or a SIM infrastructure on your side to do it. You can't do it manually or directly through the portal, which is a big problem for us. I had a call yesterday with Imperva for the roadmap, and I just told them this. They agreed that this is an improvement point from their side."
"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."
"The solution needs to improve Integration with third parties for their on-prem deployment models. The integration is not that good yet."
"The mitigation scope of Origin Protection is not fully efficient as there could be delays in activating the countermeasures."
"The solution must provide features for the post-processing of the traffic type and the traffic quality."
"One thing that we would like to improve from them is to provide more training to SOC team for them to have a deep understanding of the solution so that they would always be ready to answer anything without the need to escalate queries to senior personnel."
"One of the features that should be added to the next release is report generation. Currently, reports can be downloaded every month and are only available at the beginning of each month. It would be nice to generate the reports based on specific dates that we prefer and not have to wait until the next month for the current month’s report."
"There was a certain level of performance degradation in the solution, which I don't know if it can be tuned...In my experience, it is an area that can be improved while also considering the stability and scalability aspects of the solution."
Imperva DDoS is ranked 6th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 74 reviews while Nexusguard DDoS Protection is ranked 13th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 5 reviews. Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8, while Nexusguard DDoS Protection is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nexusguard DDoS Protection writes "A solution requiring straightforward maintenance while remaining cost-effective compared to its competitors in the market". Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and AWS WAF, whereas Nexusguard DDoS Protection is most compared with Cloudflare, Arbor DDoS, Cloudflare DDoS, Corero and Fortinet FortiDDoS. See our Imperva DDoS vs. Nexusguard DDoS Protection 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.