No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

G-Core Labs CDN vs Imperva Application Security Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 2026

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

G-Core Labs CDN
Ranking in CDN
24th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Managed DNS (14th)
Imperva Application Securit...
Ranking in CDN
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
148
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (1st), Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (3rd), Bot Management (1st), API Security (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the CDN category, the mindshare of G-Core Labs CDN is 1.3%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Imperva Application Security Platform is 7.0%, down from 8.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
CDN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Imperva Application Security Platform7.0%
G-Core Labs CDN1.3%
Other91.7%
CDN
 

Featured Reviews

Edgar Mart - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Technical Support Engineer at HayPost CJSC
Works without interruption, scales well, and has perfect uptime
Our website works without interruption almost until late at night, as many students have the opportunity to study in the evening. Most of all, we appreciate the stable and fast work of g-core. Uptime is always perfect. With such a volume of data as we have, failures can occur from time to time. The support solves everything in the shortest possible time. I love that the guys are constantly trying to improve the service. Our online school is expanding every year, and there are no problems that our provider can’t solve. They also have the opportunity to negotiate individual conditions for complex sites.
reviewer2818155 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Associate at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Application protection has improved and reporting and dashboards still need refinement
I believe Imperva Application Security Platform should have a more interactive wizard. While the dashboard is good, it could be more eye-catching. Based on my perspective, I recommend modifying the dashboards, especially the main dashboard where I can see the traffic hit count, alerts, and other latest information. In terms of reporting, I find it challenging to create reports; in my earlier days, it was difficult. Over time, I have learned how to create reports, but it should be easier to do so. I have used other tools such as firewalls or SolarWinds, where creating a report is straightforward and does not take much time, unlike in Imperva, where I have to add many elements. Modifications in the integration aspects would also be beneficial.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Uptime is always perfect."
"The support is amazing! They solve the issues on the fly."
"The CDN interface is intuitive and user-friendly, and there are no intrusive ads or upselling additional services. Everything is self-contained, and it's a convenient CDN overall. We also loved that they provided a free trial period. They always seem to do what's best for the consumer and the internet."
"Since transitioning to G-Core, our site has started working much faster, and freezes have stopped. Users are staying on the site longer and visiting more sections. We increased the number of customers by 30 percent in the past six months. This is partially attributable to G-Core services."
"We've done a lot of research into CDN providers, and G-Core offers the best service for the lowest cost."
"The dashboard is good and user-friendly."
"Great product, it will not let you down!"
"The Imperva Web Application Firewall feature I have found the most valuable is the ease of deployment."
"Imperva anti-DDoS protection has the well-known value of having lots of distributed nodes around the world, making it the best value for DDoS protection."
"The most valuable features of the Imperva Web Application Firewall are performance and flexibility, and we can extend or customize the box itself."
"​Technical support provides good, quick responses."
"The solution is really stable; it's a product that I can stand by and recommend because I know it's going to work for the customer."
"The most valuable features are DDoS protection."
 

Cons

"It would be great if there were a section on the provider's website that shows a set of services for a particular business. It would be helpful to have some kind of checklist of services that are suitable for your blog, which are required, and which can be set up later."
"There are some nuances in the tariff configurations that we found confusing. We would like more flexibility in this area."
"I would like to have one optimized report that we could use for our own needs."
"Once in the past six months, we got a "site is unavailable" error for a maximum of 20 minutes."
"The Imperva Web Application Firewall automations are good, but there is still room for improvement with them."
"Delivery services and information security."
"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."
"The price of Imperva Web Application Firewalls is expensive compared to others."
"Improve reporting interface and filtering."
"They guarantee to fix your problem within 15 minutes, but they don’t always keep their word."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is a good system, but we found that the visibility of the diverse-path server, e.g. where the traffic is coming from, the different IPs, etc., needs improvement."
"The tool needs to include artificial intelligence and machine learning. It also needs to improve profiling."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of G-Core Labs CDN is very reasonable in comparison with other companies. We've done a lot of research into CDN providers, and G-Core offers the best service for the lowest cost."
"It is a very expensive solution. The price is very high. A lot of customers tell us that they would love to use Imperva more. I have some customers who have 50 websites, but they have only 10 websites on Imperva because of the price. They would love to have all their websites running through Imperva, but they can't. They have to choose the more critical websites to protect because the price is very high. It is a very good product, but it is too expensive. If you buy a plan for 20 megabytes and you don't consume all of your 20 megabytes, it is okay, but if you consume more, you are charged for the superior traffic."
"Pricing could be more competitive."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten."
"The cost is somewhere around $10,000 a site. For every site, you pay individually. For every DNS entry, you have you pay."
"Imperva charges us based on bandwidth, which is better than other vendors that charge us according to data transfer."
"The tool's pricing is good."
"There are some licenses that you have to buy to use some features. Its price could be better. Price is always important because, at the end of the day, customers have a budget. If you can meet the budget, you can sell, and if you don't, you cannot sell."
"The price of Imperva Web Application Firewalls is expensive compared to others."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which CDN solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Construction Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business88
Midsize Enterprise25
Large Enterprise71
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for G-Core Labs CDN?
Compared to other solutions currently available on the market, the price of G-Core Labs CDN is very reasonable. G-Core CDN has 4 pricing editions: a free model, START 1.5TB, PRO 5TB, and a custom o...
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 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...
What needs improvement with Imperva DDoS?
I would like to see improvements in the pooling of threats and attacks, possibly to enlarge the scale of indicators of compromise. For example, the initiation of an attack on the endpoint level cou...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Imperva Bot Management, Imperva Web Application Firewall, Imperva API Security
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

avast, TEDx, Nanobit, Group Wagner, Momento
Hitachi, BNZ, Bitstamp, Moz, InnoGames, BTCChina, Wix, LivePerson, Zillow and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about G-Core Labs CDN vs. Imperva Application Security Platform and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.