We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiADC and Imperva DDoS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Citrix, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)."Simple to use and easy to integrate."
"Ease of use in deploying and having it up and running requires minimal knowledge."
"Because ADC is the intermediary between the servers and the end-user application, it gives thorough information about the traffic, what the problem is."
"It's a good product because it supports all the features that ADC solutions in the market can support, like F5 solutions, for example, such as the LTM of F5."
"Fortinet FortiADC is a good product because each and every piece of content is monitored by it."
"The main feature that we use is GSLB (Global Server Load Balancing). GSLB makes the customer's network more reliable by scaling applications across multiple datacenters. GSLB as a disaster recovery solution can direct traffic based on site availability."
"Although FortiADC has multiple features that I like, the global DNS is the most helpful. It is primarily useful for customers with huge environments and at least two data centers. FortiADC can act as your DNS server. It can check which data center has the lowest latency, and route traffic to that one. It's an intelligent DNS."
"From a technical perspective, it is the most scalable device from Fortinet."
"Imperva DDoS is fairly stable, and its availability is quite high."
"It fits our requirements, as well as our budget."
"There is no need to have an appliance in house for the services because it is on the cloud."
"The dashboard is good and user-friendly."
"Integration with IBM AS/400 and Db2 is okay."
"Real-time monitoring is also a great tool, as you may watch several parameters in real time."
"The most valuable features are DDoS protection."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is easy to configure."
"The solution's WAF needs an upgrade because it is not as good as FortiWeb, VMware, F5, or Imperva."
"There is a mismatch between the number of features they are offering and the device capacity on how much it can handle."
"Technical support and documentation could both be improved."
"Fortinet has some drawbacks, and it can be a bit challenging to scale."
"Issues with SSL and encrypted traffic."
"I had a terrible experience with Fortinet support. I only used support once when I bought the solution. I got no response for two days. However, I believe that it's no longer the case. Fortinet solutions have problems when they're launched. For example, we had issues with Fortinet's authenticator when it came out. We also had trouble with FortiNAC in the beginning."
"The solution should improve finding false positives and false negatives. There are a lot of false positives."
"The user interface could be more friendly and CLI could be more like that of Fortigate."
"It would be better if we were able to manage and apply changes to multiple websites/web applications, and search WAF logs for multiple websites, via the Incapsula dashboard."
"The solution should integrate with something that looks at continuous security management."
"The weakest point of Imperva is their first level of support, which should be improved. They should also improve the access and security logs viewing directly on the portal. I would like to see better access and security logs through the portal and not only through a SIM solution. Currently, if you want to explore your access and security logs from Imperva, you need a SIM tool or a SIM infrastructure on your side to do it. You can't do it manually or directly through the portal, which is a big problem for us. I had a call yesterday with Imperva for the roadmap, and I just told them this. They agreed that this is an improvement point from their side."
"It needs to be improved every time there are new attacks."
"I would like to see automated reporting to improve visibility."
"I would like to have support for SSL management and secure DNS."
"We would like them to hire people in Sweden because it's quite hard when people are sitting in the UK or Belgium because some of the customers really want them to be local."
"Its price could be improved. It is quite expensive. It will be good if we could export the configuration. Currently, to control the configuration, we need to go to each website, which is not very convenient."
Fortinet FortiADC is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 19 reviews while Imperva DDoS is ranked 7th in Distributed Denial of Service (DDOS) Protection with 74 reviews. Fortinet FortiADC is rated 7.8, while Imperva DDoS is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiADC writes "High-level load balancing and routing protocols but scalability is limited to 200 gigabits". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Imperva DDoS writes "I like the content monitoring feature which I haven't seen in other WAF solutions". Fortinet FortiADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiWeb, Citrix NetScaler, Kemp LoadMaster and Barracuda Load Balancer ADC, whereas Imperva DDoS is most compared with Cloudflare, Akamai, Arbor DDoS, Radware DefensePro and HAProxy.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.