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.
"The most valuable feature of F5 Advanced WAF is its ability to have a pool of resources that can distribute your traffic, and that is a plus for me. My company tried to look into a competitor, Imperva, but it was lacking that capability, so F5 Advanced WAF outperforms Imperva."
"Identification, ease of use, and ease of modifying it to most of our needs are valuable."
"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."
"Good dashboard and reporting."
"It also has antivirus and DDoS mitigation capabilities. We have enabled these features."
"This solution is an enterprise-class firewall that provides both load-balancing and security."
"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."
"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."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are performance and flexibility. We can extend or customize the box itself."
"Very scalable and very stable firewall for web applications, with a good interface in its cloud version. Mitigation is its most valuable feature. The technical support for this product is also good."
"Imperva WAF's strongest features are the detection of web application threats and vulnerabilities in the source code."
"Imperva is easy to use and deploy. The UI is excellent."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is a highly stable solution and is very mature."
"Data masking is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The dynamic profiling of websites is the solution's most valuable feature. The security is also good."
"It has fewer false positives"
"People who want to work with the device have to be pro in Linux"
"This solution can be made more user-friendly."
"The Sandbox integration feature could be improved."
"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."
"The solution should include protection against web page attacks like what is available in FortiWeb."
"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."
"There is a learning curve that extends the time of implementation."
"One area for improvement in the product is its SSO integration, which posed challenges and required significant effort to resolve."
"One potential improvement for Imperva is enhancing its alert system."
"It would be helpful to have a "recommended deployment", or even a list of basic features that should either be used or turned on by default."
"They recently separated the WAF and the DAM management gateways in order for each of these to be managed from different areas, so I believe it now requires additional investments for what was previously a single complete solution."
"In the past, I have bugs on the WAF. I've contacted Imperva about them. Future releases should be less buggy."
"Sometimes, support tickets don't get addressed quickly."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall could improve the API integration. It was complex for us. Additionally, The onboarding could be better."
"I would like to improve the tool's turnaround time in terms of support."
"I am looking for more data enrichment. We should have the ability to add our own custom data to the system, to the live traffic."
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.
