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

NGINX App Protect vs Salt 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

NGINX App Protect
Ranking in API Security
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (20th), Container Security (27th)
Salt Security
Ranking in API Security
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.5
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
AI Security (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the API Security category, the mindshare of NGINX App Protect is 3.7%, down from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Salt Security is 9.1%, down from 9.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
API Security Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Salt Security9.1%
NGINX App Protect3.7%
Other87.2%
API Security
 

Featured Reviews

Valerio Guaglianone - PeerSpot reviewer
Dev Ops Engineer at adesso AG
Long-term web protection has supported reliable traffic management but needs a simpler interface
NGINX App Protect is a good product. I have used both versions from F5 -also the free version- (I mean the NGINX/NGINX One/App Protect free trial period), and I think it is a good product. It's stable, affordable, and easy to manage. NGINX App Protect is a comprehensive security solution that combines advanced WAF, DoS protection, API security, and DevSecOps automation in a lightweight, scalable package ideal for modern cloud-native architectures. The adaptive machine learning capabilities are truly commendable, as the solution can establish traffic baselines and detect anomalies in real time. It automatically adjusts security policies, minimizing the need for manual intervention and reducing false positives. Additionally, it supports scalable deployment across diverse environments, including on-premises, cloud, Kubernetes, and containers, offering both flexibility and scalability I have experience with the web server, F5 load balancer, and similar products provided by Ergon, for eg. the web application firewall and the Microgateway for K8S. I'm also familiar with F5 BIG-IP products.
Tbaker Baker - PeerSpot reviewer
Risk Advisory Senior Manager at a marketing services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Behavioral AI has protected critical applications and now blocks complex external attacks
I think Salt Security could improve their implementations. The one that I saw was very complex and took quite a bit of time, and if the environment is unique at all, it takes quite a bit of time to figure out how to properly ensure that it will be implemented. A lot of times there is a steep learning curve for someone that hasn't been in it to figure out the APIs and really dig deep into it, but once you get used to it, it is easy. However, that ramp-up period could be tough. I think Salt Security could use a more enterprise focus. Some of the smaller companies that I have referred them to think it is a little bit too complex for them, so if they could come up with a different version or something a little bit easier to simplify their platform, they may be able to find more customers that way.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility."
"The most valuable feature is that I can establish different services from the firewall."
"NGINX App Protect is a good product and performs very well even when it is under stress."
"Based on my experience, this solution is better than the other choices on the market."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the OWASP certification. Additionally, the tool's ability to enforce strong passwords and OTP within minutes is impressive. With its analytics and recommendations, it is a very good solution."
"The most valuable feature is that there is a link in the system that will help to analyze the security of an application when something abnormal is found."
"The initial setup was simple and took three to four days."
"We have seen a return on investment using NGINX App Protect."
"Salt Security has positively impacted my organization and my client's organization by being able to stop cyberattacks and ensure that they have proper security over all their applications, giving them a sense of peace of mind that they have security over something that could ultimately take down the whole company if not mitigated properly."
"Salt Security gave me much better visibility into API risk, helping me identify exposed endpoints, misconfigured APIs, and sensitive data flowing through APIs that required additional controls, and it has become an important part of my API security program."
"Salt Security gives you visibility of all your APIs, identifies API security issues, and immediately alerts you of attacks."
"It's really great. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. I haven't encountered any instability issues."
 

Cons

"NGINX App Protect would be improved with integration with Shape and F5 WAF, which would make it easy for users to manage all their web application security with a single solution."
"This solution is not really scalable. Both the virtual appliance and the physical appliance are limited in terms of how much traffic they can handle."
"The integration of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"The dashboard could provide a more comprehensive view of the status of the connections."
"The support from NGINX App Protect is too expensive."
"They could provide a better user interface."
"They have a messy license model; it's not really made for microservice architecture. It's getting expensive really, really fast."
"Right now, the tool doesn't provide an option revolving around update feeds, specifically the signature update option in the UI."
"The setup cost was acceptable, but adding additional APIs was actually quite expensive."
"The integration part could be a bit extended."
"Regarding scalability, for users in smaller environments, it is not exactly the best."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our licensing costs are about $40,000 a year."
"The licensing fees for this solution are pretty expensive for what it does, but there is no alternative."
"There is a monthly or annual subscription to use NGINX App Protect. There are not any additional costs to the subscription."
"There is a license needed to use NGINX App Protect."
"The solution's price is reasonable."
"Really understand the licensing model, because we underestimated that."
"The product's price is high."
"There are not any additional costs we had to pay to use NGINX App Protect."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which API Security solutions are best for your needs.
915,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
13%
Construction Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise14
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NGINX App Protect?
I will not be able to answer about my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for NGINX App Protect, as something different handles that in my team.
What needs improvement with NGINX App Protect?
I did not face any issues with NGINX App Protect. The only issue that we had is that someone was trying to install the POC for the customer, and he by mistake installed the Instance Manager on the ...
What is your primary use case for NGINX App Protect?
I have been dealing with NGINX App Protect and the WAF policy. I usually recommend NGINX App Protect for banking and telecom, and for anyone that has their own database or servers that they host we...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Salt Security?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that I think it was affordable. For smaller companies, it might be a barrier to entry, but for the large enterprise that I was working with,...
What needs improvement with Salt Security?
I think Salt Security could improve their implementations. The one that I saw was very complex and took quite a bit of time, and if the environment is unique at all, it takes quite a bit of time to...
What is your primary use case for Salt Security?
My main use case for Salt Security is that one of my clients uses it as a security vendor for their security across all of their overlying applications. I can give you a specific example of how my ...
 

Also Known As

NGINX WAF, NGINX Web Application Firewall
Salt Security API Protection Platform
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Appsflyer, Armis, City National Bank, Coralogix, Finastra, Gett, Honeybook, Payoneer
Find out what your peers are saying about NGINX App Protect vs. Salt Security and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.