We performed a comparison between Imperva Web Application Firewall and Wallarm NG WAF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF)."I have had a positive experience with Imperva Web Application Firewall's tech support so far. They are knowledgeable and respond on time."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are performance and flexibility. We can extend or customize the box itself."
"There are a number of features that are valuable such as the account takeover and various antivirus features."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is cloud-based and offers us good uptime. It has combined web and API security. Therefore, with one license, you access both application security and also API security."
"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 important feature I have found to be the ease in how to do the backup and restores."
"The configurability of the tools and the ease of operation to be the most valuable feature of Imperva."
"Helps us to monitor situation in regards to attacks to our sites and prevents a lot of them."
"The solution works for particular zones but isn't always the best solution for all zones."
"I think that better bot protection is needed in this solution."
"The UI interface needs improvement."
"It would be useful if the solution used more intelligence in attack protection. For example, firewalls are to be dependent on the configuration, but if they could have some data science around it the solution would be even better. The profiling of the traffic, and making decisions surrounding that should be intelligence-based, instead of being based on the configuration of the firewall itself."
"It is complicated to integrate the solution's on-cloud version with other platforms."
"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."
"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."
"The tool needs to improve CPU and storage memory."
"The biggest problem for us was the stability and speed using the first version of Wallarm. Now, it is fine."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 46 reviews while Wallarm NG WAF is ranked 32nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6, while Wallarm NG WAF is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Wallarm NG WAF writes "Active threat detection and adaptive rules are the most valuable for us". Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb and Azure Front Door, whereas Wallarm NG WAF is most compared with Salt Security, Noname Security, AWS WAF, F5 Advanced WAF and Cloudflare.
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.
