Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AWS WAF vs Indusface AppTrana comparison

 

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

AWS WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
4th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
61
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Indusface AppTrana
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
27th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (20th), Bot Management (12th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of AWS WAF is 5.6%, down from 10.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Indusface AppTrana is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
AWS WAF5.6%
Indusface AppTrana0.5%
Other93.9%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Azam S M - PeerSpot reviewer
Infrastructure Lead at Danat Fz LLC
Has successfully filtered malicious traffic and allowed country-specific access controls
For improvement in AWS WAF, we can have better monitoring. One of the things that should be improved in AWS WAF is the monitoring; we need to identify the requests and where they are coming from. If it's a bot, we should differentiate the requests, whether they are automated or not. The way we see it now is just mentioned as a percentage from bots and actual users, which should include proper graphs and detailed information. We also need a feature where we can filter specific requests. If there are scripts in the requests, we should be able to filter those requests to see if there are any scripts running from them.
Arshad Nr - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Security Consultant at CyberNxt Solutions LLP
Provides comprehensive executive vulnerability scanning report for applications
Dashboards are very helpful for showcasing Top 5 attacked applications, Top 5 Vulnerable applications, and Top 5 Vulnerabilities affected in Applications. It helped me to prioritize the resources to secure and showcase the same to management. We don't need to analyze manually to identify all the applications and logs to find top priorities. The Apptrana helped to identify it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of AWS WAF is its highly configurable rules system."
"The most valuable feature of AWS WAF is the extra layer of security that I have when connecting to my web applications."
"The solution is stable."
"Stable and scalable web application firewall. Setting it up is straightforward."
"It is Amazon. Everything is scalable. It is beyond what we need."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the ability to integrate central sets. It protects from intrusion attacks such as scripting and SQL injections."
"It is a one-click WAF with no effort needed."
"The product’s availability, ease of configuration, and documentation are valuable."
"We use Indusface AppTrana as a firewall."
"AppTrana helped us to protect the public-hosted Web, API, and Mobile applications by acting as a strong WAF solution which has Machine learning compatibility that analyzes and blocks the Behavior DDoS attacks."
 

Cons

"The serverless product from AWS WAF could be improved. For example, they have only one serverless series, Lambda, but they should extend and improve it. Additionally, the firewall rules are not very easy to configure."
"In a future release I would like to see automation. There's no interaction between the applications and that makes it tedious. We have to do the preparation all over again for each of our other applications."
"An improvement area would be that it's more of a manual effort when you have to enable rules. That's one of the downsides. If that can be done in an automated way, it would be great. That's a lagging feature currently."
"AWS WAF could improve by making the overall management easier. Many people that have started working with AWS WAF do not have an easy time. They should make it easy to use."
"The product could be improved by expanding the weightage units of rules."
"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."
"The solution could be more reliable."
"They should make the implementation process faster."
"The solution should add an enhanced dashboard to make it easy to navigate."
"AppTrana should improve its backend and frontend connections and loading speed. It is slower compared to other cloud solutions and sometimes it does not sync properly with front-end options and backend."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate AWS WAF's pricing a seven out of ten."
"We are kind of doing a POC comparison to see what works best. Pricing-wise, AWS is one of the most attractive ones. It is fairly cheap, and we like the pricing part. We're trying to see what makes more sense operation-wise, license-wise, and pricing-wise."
"It's an annual subscription."
"AWS WAF is pay-as-you-go, I only pay for what I'm using. There is no subscription or any payment upfront, I can terminate use at any time. Which is an advantage."
"The pricing should be more affordable, especially as it pertains to small clients."
"You need an additional AWS subscription for this product if you are buying a managed tool."
"The product’s pricing is reasonable."
"I rate the product price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is high price, and ten is low price"
"Indusface AppTrana is an affordable and cost-effective solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
881,455 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business22
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise26
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What are the limitations of AWS WAF vs alternative WAFs?
Hi Varun, I have had experienced with several WAF deployments and deep technical assessments of the following: 1. Imperva WAF 2. F5 WAF 3. Polarisec Cloud WAF Typical limitations on cloud WAF is t...
How does AWS WAF compare to Microsoft Azure Application Gateway?
Our organization ran comparison tests to determine whether Amazon’s Web Service Web Application Firewall or Microsoft Azure Application Gateway web application firewall software was the better fit ...
What do you like most about AWS WAF?
The most valuable feature of AWS WAF is its highly configurable rules system.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Indusface AppTrana?
Indusface AppTrana is an affordable and cost-effective solution.
What needs improvement with Indusface AppTrana?
AppTrana should improve its backend and frontend connections and loading speed. It is slower compared to other cloud solutions and sometimes it does not sync properly with front-end options and bac...
 

Also Known As

AWS Web Application Firewall
AppTrana
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

eVitamins, 9Splay, Senao International
Shoppers Stop, TCS
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS WAF vs. Indusface AppTrana and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,455 professionals have used our research since 2012.