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

F5 Advanced WAF vs Oracle Dyn Web Application Security 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

F5 Advanced WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
72
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Oracle Dyn Web Application ...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
55th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (36th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of F5 Advanced WAF is 7.8%, down from 10.3% 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 (%)
F5 Advanced WAF7.8%
Oracle Dyn Web Application Security0.2%
Other92.0%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Kallamuddin Ansari - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Consultant at ProTechmanize
Application security has protected critical banking services while policy learning minimizes false blocks
F5 Advanced WAF performs well overall, but I have noticed some points that could enhance the solution. Initially, policy tuning could be simpler, as while the learning engine is powerful, initial tuning still requires experienced engineers, which can be challenging for new teams due to the complexity of options and parameters. A more guided and simple tuning workflow would help reduce the learning curve. Additionally, tighter native integration with SIEM or SOAR tools would simplify correlation and investigations for security teams, although log exports are available. Overall, these are not blockers, merely enhancement opportunities, and once tuned, F5 Advanced WAF is very stable and reliable; improving usability, reporting, and onboarding would make it even more effective for larger environments.
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

"I like them because I like the security solution. They get extra marks compared to other solutions or competitors. There are more features than any other product I can think of. They're always monitoring, and the security features offer more than other, lesser products."
"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."
"Customers find the load balancer feature as the most valuable."
"Good technology for mitigating different application attacks, e.g. DDoS, DNS, and layer seven attacks."
"The solution is easily accessible on mobile and laptop devices."
"The AOF solution provides numerous security features."
"It's a fairly easy-to-use and user-friendly tool. My administrators and team also like its ability to customize the rules per the requirements."
"Very easy to implement and works well."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
 

Cons

"It's sometimes difficult to customize APIs with F5 Advanced WAF."
"The solution's dashboard could be improved. When you're moving from policy to policy, the logs and the integration of the logs in other systems aren't straightforward."
"F5 Advanced needs to improve its bot protection. The solution needs to have machine learning to learn the behavior of the customer to recognize the human versus the bot. This is a difficult feature to explain to our customers. I would like documentation about the bot feature to make it easier for the customer to understand."
"The overall price of F5 Advanced WAF could improve."
"I would like to see a better interface and better documentation compatibility with other products. It's more complicated with OWASP."
"It's a powerful tool yet can be complex for new users."
"The solution could improve by having an independent capture module. It has a built feature that you can deploy the capture on your published website. However, it's not very user-friendly. When you compare this feature to Google Capture or other enterprise captures, they are very simple. It needs a good connection to the F5 Advanced WAF sandbox. When you implement this feature in the data center, you may suffer some complications with connecting to the F5 Advanced WAF sandbox. This should be improved in the future."
"There are opportunities for improvement in updating the user interface to a more modern look."
"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

"I don't have any issue with the pricing of this solution."
"Licensing fees for this solution are paid on a yearly basis."
"I think the price is very high."
"There are different licenses available to use F5 Advanced WAF, such as BT, ASM, and LPM."
"The pricing of F5 Advanced WAF is more expensive than other solutions like Radware and CD18, it is quite high."
"I am not sure about pricing but licenses are available on Google."
"The price of F5 Advanced WAF could improve it is expensive."
"F5 Advanced WAF's pricing is high."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business25
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise31
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about F5 Advanced WAF?
It's a fairly easy-to-use and user-friendly tool. My administrators and team also like its ability to customize the rules per the requirements.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 Advanced WAF?
Regarding the price, I think the cost is a bit higher compared to others. Earlier we were using Radware, and compared to Radware, it is very high. However, it is providing more features than Radwar...
What needs improvement with F5 Advanced WAF?
In terms of additional features I would like to see from them in the future, I think the GTM is a bit complicated to configure, which I observed. Otherwise, LTM and WAF are straightforward. I faced...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Dyn Web Application Security, Zenedge
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bank
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.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.