We performed a comparison between F5 Advanced WAF and FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) 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 initial setup was was easy to install."
"My favorite feature of F5 is the ability to play around with the ciphers. I also like the ability to have an immediate display of the support IDs when a real blockage occurs. The protection offered is great."
"F5 Advanced WAF is a stable solution, we are satisfied. It is more stable than ForiWeb."
"Identification, ease of use, and ease of modifying it to most of our needs are valuable."
"The solution isn't too expensive. The license allows you to license what you need and leave out what you don't need."
"The solution is easily accessible on mobile and laptop devices."
"It is also quite intuitive and user-friendly. They have several webinars that are actually like labs. You can use these webinars to learn about how to use all features of the product."
"I like them because I like the security solution. They get extra marks compared to other solutions or competitors. There are more features than any other product I can think of. They're always monitoring, and the security features offer more than other, lesser products."
"We use it to secure VMs and applications. It protects against DDoS attacks. It's very user-friendly."
"The machine learning on FortiWeb WAF is valuable."
"The platform's stability is good."
"The initial setup was easy since it was possible to get remote support for the product."
"The most valuable features of the solution are SD-WAN, filtration, web filter, application filter, and IPS."
"The tool's HTTP traffic, website fixing, and blocking are fantastic. It is user-friendly with easy configuration."
"The tool secures our critical applications, especially the mobile money application, which is often targeted by attacks. The solution provides rapid protection and has proven reliable against various threats."
"It is good for web tracking applications."
"There is a gap in report management."
"We get false positives sometimes."
"Nevertheless, F5 products are generally considered to be hard to deploy."
"The BIG-IQ is supposed to centralize the management for all of the boxes but it's not very effective."
"It should be a little bit easy to deploy in terms of the overall deployment session. One of our customers is a bit unhappy about the reporting options. Currently, it automatically deletes event logs after some limit if a customer doesn't have any external Syslog server. It is a problem for those customers who want to review event logs after a week or so because they won't get proper reports or event logs. They should increase the duration to at least a month or two for storing the data on the device. F5 is not a leader in Gartner Quadrant, which affects us when we go and pitch this solution. Customers normally go and take a look at such annual reports, and because F5 is currently not there as a leader, the customers ask about it even though we are saying it is good in all things. F5 is not known for something totally different or unique. They were a major player in ADP, and they are just rebranding themselves into security. They should improve or increase their marketing as a security company now. They have already started to do that, but they should do it more so that when it comes to security, customers can easily remember F5. At the moment, if we say F5, load balancing comes to mind. With rebranding and marketing, all customers should get the idea that F5 is now mainly focusing on the security part of it, and it is a security company instead of load balancing. This is the first solution that should come to a customer's mind for a web application firewall."
"F5 Advanced WAF needs better integration within the application, like remote dashboards."
"Most customers encounter stability issues with the product's Big-IP logs."
"Its price should be better. It is expensive."
"There is room for improvement in pricing, and actually, the price is a bit higher because on the same terms I purchased, the support subscription is so high."
"FortiWeb Web Application Firewall's signature database updates could be improved."
"It would be good if the solution integrated with other solutions, like SAP."
"The product lacks features offered by enterprise-level firewall tools."
"FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) needs to update its attack prevention database."
"We have encountered issues with webhooks and management of FortiWeb Web Application Firewall's on-premise version."
"The product is complicated to set up."
"FortiWeb Web Application Firewall needs to improve its performance."
More FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) Pricing and Cost Advice →
F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 2nd in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 55 reviews while FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) is ranked 16th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 13 reviews. F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.6, while FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "Flexible configuration, reliable, and highly professional support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) writes "Protects internal applications and prevents target attacks ". F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, AWS WAF, Imperva Web Application Firewall and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), whereas FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) is most compared with Azure Front Door. See our F5 Advanced WAF vs. FortiWeb Web Application Firewall (WAF) 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.