We performed a comparison between AWS WAF and Fortinet FortiWeb based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Fortinet FortiWeb is the winner in this comparison. According to reviews, it is a more comprehensive solution than AWS WAF. Reviewers are happier with the pricing of AWS WAF, however.
"It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed."
"It's simple, easy to use."
"The most valuable features are the geo-restriction denials and the web ACL."
"If hackers try to insert bugs, the tool blocks it."
"AWS WAF has a lot of integrated features and services. For example, there are security services that can be integrated very well for our customers."
"AWS WAF is something that someone from a cloud background or cloud security background leverages. If they want to natively use a solution in the cloud, AWS WAF comes in handy. It's very useful for that, and the way we can fine-tune the WAF rules is also nice."
"Its best feature is that it is on the cloud and does not require local hardware resources."
"The simple configuration and the scalability have been most valuable. We are able to scale across all of our different AWS instances."
"Fortinet is a great SD-WAN player when it comes to security capabilities."
"The valuable feature of Fortinet FortiWeb vulnerability scanner"
"The customers are very happy with this solution because of two things. First, the IPS integration with a web application is very tightly done on Fortinet. Second, the ease of use is there. The management interface or the GUI interface is very easy to use, configure, and manage. These are the two main valuable features. It supports integration with other Fortinet products. It also integrates very well with the firewall and sandboxing technology. They already have enough integration with different technologies. They have got a complete tech intelligence view of the whole product."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"The ease of configuration is valuable. We have Azure WAF, we have OCI WAF, and we also have Cloud Armor for GCP, but their configuration isn't very easy. It's pretty simple in FortiWeb, and we can enable or configure whatever we want."
"The most important feature of this solution is protection from attack."
"We find that it is quite stable and reliable."
"The solution has a very simple deployment."
"The product could be improved by expanding the weightage units of rules."
"The solution could be more reliable."
"It will be helpful if the product recommends rules that we can implement."
"AWS WAF would be better if it uses AI or machine learning to detect a potential attack or a potential IP that creates an attack even before it happens. I want AWS WAF to capture the IP and automatically write the rule to automate the entire process."
"We should be able to do proper whitelisting."
"On the UI side, I would like it if they could bring back the geolocation view on the corner."
"The solution is cloud-based, and therefore the billing model that comes with it could be more intuitive, in my opinion. It's very easy to not fully understand how you tag things for billing and then you can quite easily run up a high bill without realizing it. The solution needs to be more intuitive around the tagging system, which enables the billing. Right now, I have a cloud architect that does that on our behalf and it isn't something that a business user could use because it still requires quite a lot of technical knowledge to do effectively."
"For now, there is no feature to protect against attack of the bad bots"
"The reporting could be optimized."
"The initial setup process could be improved."
"The dashboard evaluating the performance of each application connected to the web app's firewall is quite helpful, but the tool is only available in application performance management. So I think if Fortinet could better integrate that particular feature, it would add a lot of value to the product."
"The F5 solution has more features than Fortinet FortiWeb, such as multiple load balancing."
"The integration with other products should be improved."
"The GUI could be better. It's limited."
"The solution could have more customization."
"It is not entirely user-friendly."
AWS WAF is ranked 1st in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 52 reviews while Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 83 reviews. AWS WAF is rated 8.0, while Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS WAF writes "A highly stable solution that helps mitigate different kinds of bot attacks and SQL injection attacks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "Cost-effective, easy to configure, and works very well as a single solution for multiple environments". AWS WAF is most compared with Azure Web Application Firewall, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 Advanced WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, whereas Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, Azure Web Application Firewall, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our AWS WAF vs. Fortinet FortiWeb 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.