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

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Oracle Dyn Web Application Security comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 21, 2025

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

Imperva Application Securit...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
4th
Ranking in Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
133
Ranking in other categories
CDN (4th), Bot Management (1st), API Security (2nd)
Oracle Dyn Web Application ...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
55th
Ranking in Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection
36th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Imperva Application Security Platform is 7.6%, up from 7.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Dyn Web Application Security is 0.2%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Imperva Application Security Platform7.6%
Oracle Dyn Web Application Security0.2%
Other92.2%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1247523 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Sales Services Department at a comms service provider with 51-200 employees
Solution ensures website availability and proactive threat mitigation
Over the seven years, the most valuable features of Imperva DDoS that I have found are related to DDoS attacks, which are a group of attacks, and not all of them can be resolved on the endpoint level before the website. Using the web firewall before the website is a common use case to protect against malicious requests to the website. I have utilized Imperva's Intelligent Traffic Filtering feature. This feature helps me understand how the attack is progressing and what is happening inside the requests to our website. It allows me to granularly grant or deny access to certain parts of our website. This helps when we know our customers and the types of requests that can be sent from them, enabling us to block some malicious requests. Imperva DDoS has User Behavior Analytics and Threat Intelligence on its board, and this helps us to be protected proactively. Imperva DDoS connects to its database of threats, storing whole information about attacks all over the world in one simple engine. Everyone can use this feature, which can connect to this engine and get information about what is going on at the world level. That is the way to be protected at the company's level. The integration capabilities of Imperva DDoS are very easy and simple. We can run it in 2 hours.
KA
Commercial Manager at Natco Information technology
Very secure with an easy initial setup and pretty stable
We are using the latest version of the solution. We sell this solution for financial systems. We're Oracle partners and service providers. We'll present this solution to our clients and give them a benefit analysis of the product so they can see the reasons why they need the solution or why it might help them. I'd rate this solution nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The configurability of the tools and the ease of operation to be the most valuable feature of Imperva."
"The complete solution is valuable for everything it delivers and the protection it offers."
"This product is a reliable defense from malicious attacks on a network environment."
"The solution can be configured in just a couple of minutes."
"The valuable features of Imperva WAF include its effective security breach prevention through automatically updating rules."
"It is easy to use and has good security."
"On the activity log, I can see the exact details, the visit, and the threat."
"The tool's profiling feature maps all the web application directories and related components on the profile directory. It has improved the security of my client's website applications."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
 

Cons

"One potential improvement for Imperva is enhancing its alert system."
"I would like to see automated reporting to improve visibility."
"The signature updates could be faster. Sometimes we have to upload signatures to the Imperva portal for checking and analysis before we can use them."
"Pricing can be improved, as it is quite expensive."
"I'd like the option to pick your bot protection."
"Some of the features should be included in the next release is a file integrating monitoring tool. This feature should be improved."
"The cost could be lower; our end clients need to have a high budget to purchase this solution."
"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 have a Data Mask for the next release. It would be helpful for banking institutions as they would be able to hide the server number of the ATM machine in the CPU."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost is on par with other solutions such as Cloudflare and Akamai."
"We have an issue with Imperva Incapsula in the Iraqi market because of the high price."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall price is higher compared to other solutions. However, everything is included in the price."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall's pricing is expensive."
"The price of Imperva Web Application Firewalls is expensive compared to others."
"It's an excellent product, but it can be very costly."
"There are a couple of different licensing models."
"The tool's pricing is good."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
880,255 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user68487 - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Expert with 51-200 employees
Nov 6, 2013
CloudFlare vs Incapsula: Web Application Firewall
CloudFlare vs Incapsula: Round 2 Web Application Firewall Comparative Penetration Testing Analysis Report v1.0 Summary This document contains the results of a second comparative penetration test conducted by a team of security specialists at Zero Science Lab against two cloud-based Web…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business83
Midsize Enterprise25
Large Enterprise61
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which Web Application Firewall (WAF) would you recommend? R&S or Imperva?
Imperva is a strong choice, given their security focus and ongoing R&D into the product in areas such as bot management.
What do you like most about Imperva Incapsula?
We use Imperva DDoS to stop DDoS attacks and reduce the amount of unwanted queries against web services or web scraping.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Imperva DDoS?
The pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Imperva DDoS are reasonable for the amount of technical capabilities provided. I would rate the pricing of Imperva DDoS as five, where one is very cheap a...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Imperva Bot Management, Imperva Web Application Firewall, Imperva API Security
Dyn Web Application Security, Zenedge
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hitachi, BNZ, Bitstamp, Moz, InnoGames, BTCChina, Wix, LivePerson, Zillow and more.
FoodStorm, Soccer Shots
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, F5, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: January 2026.
880,255 professionals have used our research since 2012.