Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

NGINX App Protect vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) comparison

F5 and Fastly are both solutions in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category. F5 is ranked #15 with an average rating of 8.6, while Fastly is ranked #27 with an average rating of 7.7. F5 holds a 1.8% mindshare in WAF, compared to Fastly’s 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 95% of F5 users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 50% of Fastly users who would recommend it.
NGINX App Protect
Read 24 NGINX App Protect reviews
  • 1,737 Views
  • 834 Comparison Views
95% willing to recommend
The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (po...
Read 3 The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) reviews
  • 664 Views
  • 353 Comparison Views
50% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 1, 2025

Fastly Next-Gen WAF and NGINX App Protect are competitors in the web application firewall space, each having its distinct advantages. Fastly stands out with ease of use and customer support, while NGINX is preferred for its robust feature set, enhancing its appeal for comprehensive security requirements.

Features: Fastly Next-Gen WAF offers real-time visibility, versatile deployment options across cloud, on-premise, and hybrid environments, and excellent integration with DevOps tools. NGINX App Protect provides advanced threat detection and mitigation, robust API security features, and seamless integration with the NGINX ecosystem, making it beneficial for existing NGINX users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Fastly Next-Gen WAF receives praise for its straightforward deployment process and responsive support team, suitable for various platforms. NGINX App Protect provides seamless deployment for NGINX setups but may require more configuration for new users.

Pricing and ROI: Fastly Next-Gen WAF is noted for being cost-effective and offering a quick return on investment due to scalability and application protection efficiency. NGINX App Protect, although seen as more expensive, offers extensive security features that justify the higher cost for long-term needs. Fastly is preferred by budget-conscious buyers, while NGINX appeals to those seeking comprehensive security.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed NGINX App Protect vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) Report (Updated: June 2025).
Buyer's Guide
NGINX App Protect vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)
June 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 859,129 peers since 2012

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 Web Application Firewall (WAF)
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (21st), API Security (2nd)
The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (po...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
27th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of NGINX App Protect is 1.8%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) is 1.0%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Tomaz Sobczak - PeerSpot reviewer
Signature-based detection, DOS protection, and bot protection
NGINX App Protect is easier to automate and configure, or manage from an API. This is good for securing applications. However, it's not suitable for more complex tasks. NGINX App Protect positively impacted performance changes. There's a cache or it works like a proxy, so it can speed up applications. It can also offload some functions from servers, which NGINX can handle faster.
Read full review
Archana Heeralal - PeerSpot reviewer
A good solution to implement web application firewall for applications
There are some lags in Signal Sciences for the web application firewalls. Even if we create some custom rules, Signal Sciences cannot capture some of the malicious traffic. There is a little bit of complexity with custom rules that should be removed. Signal Sciences should add a feature called rate limiting with multiple options, wherein I can create a rate limiting based on the cookie request or the IP.
Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"NGINX App Protect is stable."
"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."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"We were looking for a product that is capable of complete automation and a container based solution. It's working."
"There's a cache, or it works like a proxy, so it can speed up applications."
"Overall, I rate NGINX App Protect between eight and nine."
"NGINX App Protect has complete control over the HTTP session."
"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."
More NGINX App Protect pros
"Fastly (Signal Sciences) integrates and tags the intermittent traffic based on patterns. It generates signals and provides them in a dashboard where we can view them and decide whether to allow or deny traffic. It's a more advanced and easy-to-navigate dashboard."
"The product's most valuable feature is its ability to set up the rules easily."
"When configuring a web application firewall using Signal Sciences, we configure a rule whereby no one except a few people can access the application."
 

Cons

"The setup of NGINX App Protect is complex. The full process took one week to complete. Additionally, we had to change the network infrastructure platform which took one month."
"It would be better if it were easier to implement and if there was more information from F5 regarding hardware requirements and specifications to deploy the service, to avoid disruptions after implementation."
"They could provide a better user interface."
"The price of NGINX App Protect could improve."
"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."
"The product's user interface is an area with shortcomings as it can be quite confusing for users, making it an area where improvements are required."
"Setting policies and parameters through the UI should be more automated because the process is manual, where we can only edit one rule at a time."
"The integration of NGINX App Protect could improve."
More NGINX App Protect cons
"The areas that could be improved in Signal Sciences include the effectiveness of rules, as many didn't function optimally and required custom rule-writing to address bypasses for WAF."
"Even if we create some custom rules, Signal Sciences cannot capture some of the malicious traffic."
"Fastly don't support caching for China users. That's the only feature lacking compared to Akamai."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of NGINX App Protect is approximately $3,000 annually. All of our licenses are observed by a managed service partner."
"The solution's price is reasonable."
"Our licensing costs are about $40,000 a year."
"There is a monthly or annual subscription to use NGINX App Protect. There are not any additional costs to the subscription."
"Really understand the licensing model, because we underestimated that."
"There is a license needed to use NGINX App Protect."
"NGINX is not expensive."
"The price of NGINX App Protect is not much different from the products that fall under the leader category of Gartner Magic Quadrant."
More NGINX App Protect pricing and cost advice
"The pricing is 50% less than Akamai."
"The product has an affordable cost."
"Signal Sciences is pretty cheap compared to other solutions."
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Educational Organization
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about NGINX App Protect?
It's very easy to deploy.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NGINX App Protect?
I don't know the pricing yet because in my other project, I was not part of the buying side and I was just starting to look at options.
See all answers
What needs improvement with NGINX App Protect?
It would be better if it were easier to implement and if there was more information from F5 regarding hardware requirements and specifications to deploy the service, to avoid disruptions after impl...
See all answers
What do you like most about Signal Sciences?
The product's most valuable feature is its ability to set up the rules easily.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Signal Sciences?
The pricing is 50% less than Akamai.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Signal Sciences?
Fastly don't support caching for China users. That's the only feature lacking compared to Akamai.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

Azure Front Door vs NGINX App Protect Logo
Azure Front Door vs NGINX App Protect
Compared 18% of the time
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs NGINX App Protect Logo
Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs NGINX App Protect
Compared 17% of the time
Fortinet FortiWeb vs NGINX App Protect Logo
Fortinet FortiWeb vs NGINX App Protect
Compared 14% of the time
F5 Advanced WAF vs NGINX App Protect Logo
F5 Advanced WAF vs NGINX App Protect
Compared 9% of the time
SUSE NeuVector vs NGINX App Protect Logo
SUSE NeuVector vs NGINX App Protect
Compared 3% of the time
More NGINX App Protect Competitors
Cloudflare vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) Logo
Cloudflare vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)
Compared 19% of the time
AWS WAF vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) Logo
AWS WAF vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)
Compared 15% of the time
Azure Front Door vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) Logo
Azure Front Door vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)
Compared 11% of the time
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) Logo
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)
Compared 9% of the time
More The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
NGINX App Protect
June 2025
NGINX App Protect reportDownload NGINX App Protect product report
Buyer's Guide
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
June 2025
The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) reportDownload The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) product report
 

Also Known As

NGINX WAF, NGINX Web Application Firewall
Signal Sciences Next-Gen WAF, Signal Sciences RASP
 

Overview

NGINX App Protect application security solution combines the efficacy of advanced F5 web application firewall (WAF) technology with the agility and performance of NGINX Plus. The solution runs natively on NGINX Plus and addresses some of the most difficult challenges facing modern DevOps environments:

  • Integrating security controls directly into the development automation pipeline
  • Applying and managing security for modern and distributed application environments such as containers and microservices
  • Providing the right level of security controls without impacting release and go-to-market velocity
  • Complying with security and regulatory requirements

NGINX App Protect offers:

  • Expanded security beyond basic signatures to ensure adequate controls
  • F5 app‑security technology for efficacy superior to ModSecurity and other WAFs
  • Confidently run in “blocking” mode in production with proven F5 expertise
  • High‑confidence signatures for extremely low false positives
  • Increases visibility, integrating with third‑party analytics solutions
  • Integrates security and WAF natively into the CI/CD pipeline
  • Deploys as a lightweight software package that is agnostic of underlying infrastructure
  • Facilitates declarative policies for “security as code” and integration with DevOps tools
  • Decreases developer burden and provides feedback loop for quick security remediation
  • Accelerates time to market and reduces costs with DevSecOps‑automated security
F5

The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) provides web application and API protection, RASP, rate limiting, bot protection and DDoS purpose built to eliminate the challenges of legacy WAF.

Fastly
 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Chef, Adobe, Datadog, Etsy, GrubHub, Vimeo, SendGrid, Under Armour, Duo, AppNexus
Buyer's Guide
NGINX App Protect vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)
June 2025
Free Report: NGINX App Protect vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences)
Find out what your peers are saying about NGINX App Protect vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our NGINX App Protect vs. The Fastly Next-Gen WAF (powered by Signal Sciences) 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.