We performed a comparison between F5 Advanced WAF and NGINX App Protect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of F5 Advanced WAF is its grand unity of the implementation, where you have the freedom to configure based on how it affects your use case or your organization. With the default setting of implicit deny, you can gradually start defining and deploying the tool to align with your environment, whether it is outdated, recent, or futuristic. This allows you to customize the solution to protect you from threat actors. You have the ability to define what the advanced threat act should do - whether it should alert, deny, or both - and it will deliver based on your configuration. Unlike other online solutions, F5 Advanced WAF provides flexibility to deliver to your unique environment the way you want."
"The solution isn't too expensive. The license allows you to license what you need and leave out what you don't need."
"The anti-bot protection is the solution's most valuable feature. Safe-guard or credential staffing are also useful features."
"We can monitor IP locations, but we have constraints from each country. It has a replication feature. Licenses can be shared, taking turns with each license."
"Good technology for mitigating different application attacks, e.g. DDoS, DNS, and layer seven attacks."
"This solution inspects your traffic and based on that, automatically create distinct qualities for you, so you can add this to the policy already created. That's what I like most."
"The solution is easily accessible on mobile and laptop devices."
"With F5 Advanced WAF, it was protection for online publications and for our customers that caused us to choose the platform."
"The policies are flexible based on the technologies you use."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"The most valuable feature is that I can establish different services from the firewall."
"NGINX App Protect is stable."
"We were looking for a product that is capable of complete automation and a container based solution. It's working."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is its flexibility."
"I tested specific features and evaluated the solution against the Web Application Firewall. I conducted research to test different detection percentages. I did not use it directly for protection but for evaluation purposes."
"The most valuable feature of NGINX App Protect is the reverse proxy."
"The solution should include protection against web page attacks like what is available in FortiWeb."
"The BIG-IQ is supposed to centralize the management for all of the boxes but it's not very effective."
"The administrator's user interface and some of the settings can sometimes be very complicated to understand."
"F5 Advanced needs to improve its bot protection. The solution needs to have machine learning to learn the behavior of the customer to recognize the human versus the bot. This is a difficult feature to explain to our customers. I would like documentation about the bot feature to make it easier for the customer to understand."
"F5 Advanced WAF could improve on its funding for WAF features. There is a need to be more advanced WAF features."
"The tool needs to improve its pricing."
"The Sandbox integration feature could be improved."
"The overall price of F5 Advanced WAF could improve."
"I encountered issues with NGINX App Protect while trying to upgrade custom rules."
"Its technical support could be better."
"Currently, the policies have to be handled manually, and you have to create from scratch, which can be a bit time-consuming, in a large environment."
"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."
"Areas for improvement would be if NGINX could scan for vulnerabilities and learn and update the signatures of DoS attacks."
"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."
"It's challenging if you need to go for a high throughput."
"The solution needs to be improved in the e-commerce portal."
F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 55 reviews while NGINX App Protect is ranked 13th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 20 reviews. F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6, while NGINX App Protect is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NGINX App Protect writes "Capable of complete automation but is costly ". F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Azure Web Application Firewall, whereas NGINX App Protect is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Fortinet FortiWeb, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and Noname Security. See our F5 Advanced WAF vs. NGINX App Protect 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.
