We performed a comparison between F5 Advanced WAF and Imperva Web Application Firewall based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, F5 Advanced WAF seems to be the marginally superior solution. Our reviewers find that Imperva Web Application Firewall‘s cost makes it prohibitive for some organizations to afford.
"I like the security features, especially against SQL injection."
"One of the most valuable features is the Local Traffic Manager."
"iRules are quite appealing when it comes to F5."
"Customers find the load balancer feature as the most valuable."
"It also has antivirus and DDoS mitigation capabilities. We have enabled these features."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the WAF protection, Data Safe, and the seven-layer DDoS."
"F5 technical support is excellent. They are experts who always provide the right solution, and they understand the problem. Their response and resolution times are good."
"F5 Advanced WAF helps our engineers to learn the complete configuration, including fundamental and advanced policies."
"The solution is stable."
"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."
"Compared to other web application firewalls in the market, Imperva does things in the most accurate way."
"The compliance is the most valuable aspect."
"Very intuitive and granular configuration - It does not require much time, or advanced knowledge, for configuration and maintenance."
"There is a quick switch between any of the the nodes if something goes wrong, where there's a there's an attack against a specific area. The security setup is reasonably easy. It's not a problem to do setups and rules and integrations. And, yeah, just the the back end team is also very willing to insist if there's questions that that we cannot answer or with these questions that we do have"
"There are some features that are configured by default, so even without doing much, it can still provide a level of protection."
"It has fewer false positives"
"They could provide better pricing."
"F5 Advanced WAF could improve resource usage, it is CPU intensive. Additionally, adding automated remediation would be a benefit. For example, an easy button alerts us of the events that are occurring, and what we want to do at the time. An automated approach where somebody could be alerted very quickly. Instead of going and reconfiguring everything, an automated approach is what I'm looking at."
"The user interface (UI) seems a bit outdated. Making it more user-friendly would be beneficial."
"The delay times on firmware patches and software updates could be better and improved."
"The solution should include RASP for another level of protection at the code itself."
"We usually use a third-party tool for logging and reporting. It would be nice if we could do that right on this solution. They have one, but it's not very stable. Logging and reporting effectively would be a big enhancement."
"Most customers encounter stability issues with the product's Big-IP logs."
"The interface is old-looking, it's not modern, which is why it's not always comfortable to use."
"I don't really use it and therefore can't speak to areas of improvement."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall can improve by adding more features to the dashboard. increasing the visibility of the real-time events, besides configuring the administration itself."
"It is complicated to integrate the solution's on-cloud version with other platforms."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall could improve the API integration. It was complex for us. Additionally, The onboarding could be better."
"They can provide an option to create reports, automatically import the entire report, and create rules again. In a real-life crisis, it would be helpful to be able to import a report and generate security rules from that report. I should be able to create a simple query and import the reports automatically. It can maybe also tell us the format of the report."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is very expensive."
"Sometimes our web application firewall will slow down."
"There's always room for improvement. Occasionally, there might be false-positive alerts."
More Imperva Web Application Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 55 reviews while Imperva Web Application Firewall is ranked 6th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 47 reviews. F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6, while Imperva Web Application Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva Web Application Firewall writes "Offers simulation for studying infrastructure and hybrid infrastructure protection". F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Imperva Web Application Firewall is most compared with AWS WAF, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb, Azure Front Door and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. See our F5 Advanced WAF 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.
