Akamai App and API Protector vs Radware Kubernetes WAF comparison

Akamai and Radware are both solutions in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category. Akamai is ranked #16 with an average rating of 8.0, while Radware is ranked #28 with an average rating of 10.0. Akamai holds a 3.0% mindshare in WAF, compared to Radware’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Akamai users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Radware users who would recommend it.

Akamai App and API Protector

Read 29 Akamai App and API Protector reviews

4,499 Views
2,654 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Radware Kubernetes WAF

Read 1 Radware Kubernetes WAF review

320 Views
320 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Akamai App and API Protector

Radware Kubernetes WAF

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Akamai App and API Protector and Radware Kubernetes WAF based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, F5, Imperva and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF).

To learn more, read our detailed Web Application Firewall (WAF) Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Web Application Firewall (WAF)

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 peers since 2012

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

Akamai App and API Protector

Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)

16th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (8th), Cloud and Data Center Security (12th)

Radware Kubernetes WAF

Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)

28th

Average Rating

10.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Akamai App and API Protector is 3.0%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Radware Kubernetes WAF is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Web Application Firewall (WAF) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Akamai App and API Protector	3.0%
Radware Kubernetes WAF	0.5%
Other	96.5%

Web Application Firewall (WAF)

Featured Reviews

Gavin Pinho

Privacy & Risk Management Vice President, Information Security at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees

Has provided strong protection against evolving threats but still needs support for configuration fine-tuning

The standout features of Akamai App and API Protector are rooted in it being the Web Application Firewall, where all traffic gets scanned, including the implementation of web firewall rules, and after this phase, traffic proceeds through the BMP, which is Bot Management. Akamai App and API Protector exceeds expectations in terms of AI capabilities, and it genuinely combines a plethora of advanced features. The area in which Akamai excels compared to other competitors with a WAF is in threat intelligence, as threats continually evolve, requiring ongoing updates to backend algorithms to effectively capture smart bots, and Akamai's commitment in that regard is backed by an excellent team, while other providers are still catching up.

Read full review

SandeepRawat

Network Engineer at Rah Infotech Pvt Ltd

Provides automated protection against web attacks and simplifies deployment with cost-effective pricing

Radware Kubernetes WAF protects our web applications from web-based attacks like SQL injection and cross-site scripting. It provides automation capabilities. For example, if a DDoS attack is happening, it automatically recognizes the attack and prevents it accordingly. Radware Kubernetes WAF provides automation that is effective in dealing with security threats.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"They have a fantastic tool for analyzing and viewing your traffic."

"I can attest to its benefits in terms of understanding and mitigating threats...The solution's technical support team seems to be pretty responsive."

"It enables us to move faster with new products because we have this layer of protection set up in our infrastructure."

"The product has a good user interface."

"The most valuable feature is the custom rules feature. This is because many of our customers require a lot of custom rules. Because it's a very customized project for our customers, I think they have the best of everything already."

"Adaptive stream delivery and WAF protection are valuable."

"Akamai App and API Protector exceeds expectations in terms of AI capabilities, and it genuinely combines a plethora of advanced features."

"The most valuable feature is the DDoS protection, which is the main reason we got it."

More Akamai App and API Protector pros

"I would give Radware Kubernetes WAF a rating of 10 out of 10."

Cons

"The performance of the cloud monitoring tool is low."

"Could integrate more features for each security."

"They are already very flexible, but room for improvement is there. Reports generation could be better and should be improved."

"It's fine for a simple tool, but as I recall, if you encounter a lot of bots, scrapers, and other things, you'll need this tool bot and this other thing they offer called Bot Manager."

"One area where Akamai can improve is the captcha part. Cloudflare provides a captcha if there are a certain number of threats. For example, I can assign that if there are 10 requests within a second from a single IP, it should send a captcha to the user. The user should fill in the captcha, and only after that, the user should be able to access our website. This captcha feature should be built into Bot Manager. I love this captcha feature of Cloudflare."

"One thing I asked them is to integrate the API discovery product that they have and push that data into Akamai App and API Protector so that we do not have two types of reviews to identify the type of traffic. We already know the APIs that are frequently getting used, so analysis becomes easier. We can integrate both products and use them."

"The product should provide a secure NTP."

"The WAF features definitely have a lot of room for improvement. A lot of the WAF is really basic. For some products or some of our solutions, we need to run a second layer of more advanced WAF. If it had better layer seven protection then we would not need a second WAF."

More Akamai App and API Protector cons

"If Radware provides a separate web service like those offered by vendors such as F5 and Imperva, that would be better."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is no license at all for Akamai. They are going to charge us only for the usage."

"The solution is expensive."

"Cost depends on the volume of traffic."

"Based on the billing discussions in the DevOps team, Akamai's cost does not seem to be a major thing. However, LOE is an issue. When it comes to support, we know that even all the competitors do this. For a 30-minute issue, they give us a LOE of one or two hours. That is a basic practice, but that is something we worry about."

"Its price is slightly high. Every company has a justification for the high price. Overall, it feels worth the money based on how the service has been structured, but we do negotiate it."

"The solution is not expensive."

"One reason not all people use Akamai is that it is a little bit more expensive than some other providers."

"Akamai is very expensive."

More Akamai App and API Protector pricing and cost advice

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Performing Arts

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	7
Large Enterprise	18

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Akamai Web Application Protector?

The price is higher than others. It could be about 80% to 70% more expensive than other tools. So, it’s not just a slight difference.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Akamai Web Application Protector?

There are no significant areas for improvement on the WAF side or for Akamai App and API Protector solution; they are comprehensive in their current state.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Akamai Web Application Protector?

The main use case for Akamai App and API Protector is serving as the WAF, Web Application Firewall.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Radware Kubernetes WAF?

Radware Kubernetes WAF is less costly compared to F5.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Radware Kubernetes WAF?

If Radware provides a separate web service like those offered by vendors such as F5 and Imperva, that would be better.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Radware Kubernetes WAF?

We use Radware Kubernetes WAF to protect our web applications from web-based attacks like SQL injection and cross-site scripting. It provides an integrated web with load balancers but does not have...

See all answers

Comparisons

Cloudflare vs Akamai App and API Protector

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs Akamai App and API Protector

Compared 6% of the time

Prolexic vs Akamai App and API Protector

Compared 6% of the time

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Akamai App and API Protector

Compared 5% of the time

AWS WAF vs Akamai App and API Protector

Compared 5% of the time

More Akamai App and API Protector Competitors

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Radware Kubernetes WAF

Compared 46% of the time

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Radware Kubernetes WAF

Compared 20% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Radware Kubernetes WAF

Compared 17% of the time

Azure Front Door vs Radware Kubernetes WAF

Compared 17% of the time

More Radware Kubernetes WAF Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Akamai App and API Protector

February 2026

Download Akamai App and API Protector product report

Buyer's Guide

Web Application Firewall (WAF)

February 2026

Download Radware Kubernetes WAF product report

Also Known As

Akamai Web Application Protector, Akamai Kona Site Defender, Akamai Kona DDoS Defender

No data available

Overview

Akamai App and API Protector provides website security by preventing DDoS attacks, acting as an application firewall, managing content delivery, and monitoring APIs. It adapts to threat profiles and is used for fast media delivery and identifying malicious activities.

Akamai App and API Protector offers strong protection, adaptable security features, and efficient traffic management. Its WAF blocks IP addresses and country-specific threats while preventing SQL injections. Companies utilize it for scalable CDN services and comprehensive traffic analysis. Known for its cost-effectiveness and user-friendly dashboard, this protector stands out for its customizable rules and technical support. Users also highlight the ease of integration and detailed attack insights available through its advanced dashboard.

What are the key features of Akamai App and API Protector?

DDoS Protection: Strong defense against Distributed Denial of Service attacks.
Scalable CDN: Manages content delivery efficiently under high traffic loads.
WAF Capabilities: Blocks specific IPs and countries, prevents SQL injections.
Traffic Filtering: Analyzes and controls incoming requests to maintain security.
Adaptive Stream Delivery: Adjusts content delivery to meet bandwidth needs.

What benefits should users expect?

Cost-Effectiveness: Provides robust security tools at a competitive price.
Enhanced Security: Comprehensive protection against cyber threats.
Scalability: Easily handles increasing traffic and data loads.
Ease of Integration: Simple integration with existing systems.
Insightful Analytics: Offers data-driven insights into traffic and attack patterns.

In media, Akamai App and API Protector ensures smooth streaming by handling high bandwidth demands. E-commerce companies use it to guard against fraud and data breaches. Financial sectors rely on its ability to protect sensitive transactions. Implementations in healthcare focus on safeguarding patient data while maintaining compliance with regulations.

Akamai

Radware Kubernetes WAF is a comprehensive and highly scalable web application security solution for CI/CD environments orchestrated by Kubernetes. In addition to marketleading data and application protection, Radware Kubernetes WAF is designed to natively fit these environments, meeting the required levels of automation, flexibility and elasticity.

The solution easily integrates with common software provisioning, testing and visibility tools in the CI/CD pipeline offering both IT security and DevOps personnel detailed insight down to the pod and container levels, and enables organizations to implement effective application and data security in on-premise and cloud-based implementations.

Radware

Sample Customers

Douglas Omaha Technology Commission, ZALORA, PrintPlanet

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Web Application Firewall (WAF)

February 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, F5, Imperva and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.