No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Airlock vs F5 Advanced WAF comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Airlock
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
40th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
9.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
F5 Advanced WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
72
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Airlock is 0.8%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 Advanced WAF is 3.4%, down from 7.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 Advanced WAF3.4%
Airlock0.8%
Other95.8%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Tiodor Jovovic - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Business Officer at Sky Express
Provides endless features and can be adapted to every single application that exists in the world
WAF is the most beneficial feature for security posture. Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product. The level of detail of the configuration is the most significant aspect. We can adapt it to every single application that exists in the world. The product helps with the compliance processes.
reviewer2797602 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Security Systems Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Granular security policies have protected critical applications and ensure safe user and admin access
Improvements could be made regarding the log information from the backend CLI. There are enhancements needed; if a request gets blocked on the TCP layer, there should be traces or data to verify which source generated these requests, including the source and port information for initiation. These data are missing from F5 Advanced WAF. Besides that, another improvement could be refining the bot detection to minimize false positives; it should be able to verify more granularly between legitimate and non-legitimate clients. Overall, I find everything else good. A wish list feature I have is for the Technical Assistance Center (TAC) to respond more promptly. Their response time needs improvement; while they do not take excessive time, it can be enhanced, especially given it is a security product.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product."
"This is a good solution, it's very useful and offers easy application management, which is good to have at the perimeter level."
"The product is used to secure web applications and has the ability to use API templates and bot protection features, such as blocking requests or presenting CAPTCHA pages to end users."
"In this case, we used a few long-term models because F5 Advanced WAF is a complete solution."
"The most valuable feature of F5 Advanced WAF is its ability to mitigate attacks: DDoS and DNS, or layer seven application attacks, OWASP, and email."
"It's flexible and powerful, and the users can input their own rules to the system."
"F5 Advanced WAF is a comprehensive community platform with a strong commitment, making it valuable for businesses."
"It ensures compliance with security standards by providing features like PCI DSS checks."
"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."
 

Cons

"The tool must be simplified."
"Support is a little slow."
"My advice to future customers of F5 Advanced WAF or to people thinking of using it is that there is a much better product in the market."
"The contextual-based component needs a lot of help to catch up with the next-gen products."
"The pricing of F5 Advanced WAF is more expensive than other solutions like Radware and CD18, it is quite high."
"Improvements could be made regarding the log information from the backend CLI; if a request gets blocked on the TCP layer, there should be traces or data to verify which source generated these requests, including the source and port information for initiation."
"The solution should include protection against web page attacks like what is available in FortiWeb."
"The GUI interface can be confusing due to similar-looking tabs for policy building, traffic learning, and event logs."
"All features of Advanced WAF offer numerous functions, which means tuning configuration is not simple."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is cheap."
"After buying the program, you just pay for the support every year."
"A yearly license for F5 Advanced WAF is expensive."
"As far as the pricing of F5 Advanced WAF I would rate it a four out of five depending on what features I am looking for. Imperva is more expensive."
"It is expensive. Its price should be better. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. Its licensing is also based on the model. There are no additional costs."
"The solution is very expensive so should only be used in the right environment."
"The cost is slightly above average."
"The pricing of F5 Advanced WAF is more expensive than other solutions like Radware and CD18, it is quite high."
"F5 Advanced WAF pricing structure should be adjusted to meet the need of small to medium-sized companies."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
10%
Government
10%
Media Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business27
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise31
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 Advanced WAF?
F5 Advanced WAF is somewhat costly compared to other vendors, but it is worth the investment due to the stability it provides to the environment and infrastructure.
What needs improvement with F5 Advanced WAF?
Improvements could be made regarding the log information from the backend CLI. There are enhancements needed; if a request gets blocked on the TCP layer, there should be traces or data to verify wh...
What is your primary use case for F5 Advanced WAF?
My main use case for F5 Advanced WAF is to protect external and internal applications from cyber attacks and to prevent malicious payloads and malicious data from reaching servers. Even if maliciou...
 

Also Known As

Airlock Suite
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Raiffeisen, SGKB, Generali, Visana
MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Imperva, Radware, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: October 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.