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

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Sucuri comparison

Sponsored
 

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

Cloudflare Web Application ...
Sponsored
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Imperva Application Securit...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
144
Ranking in other categories
CDN (2nd), Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (4th), Bot Management (1st), API Security (2nd)
Sucuri
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
35th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection (26th), Domain Name System (DNS) Security (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is 4.7%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Imperva Application Security Platform is 7.7%, up from 7.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sucuri is 1.5%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Imperva Application Security Platform7.7%
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall4.7%
Sucuri1.5%
Other86.1%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

DB
CTO at PlayNirvana
Advanced security reporting has protected high-traffic betting platforms from constant attacks
I don't see room for improvement to Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. One thing I don't know much about because we have a dedicated IT team for that, and I'm not involved with Cloudflare much anymore. But if I were to compare them to F5, I would like to see more features that F5 offers. F5 has an option to bring the whole infrastructure, the whole WAF and all their packages, Bot Management, and everything else on your infrastructure. You need to install certain services from their side, and then you can choose if you would like requests to hit your servers immediately or if requests need to be proxied through F5 backbone. That would be a nice addition because we have 90% of the traffic as legit traffic coming from whitelisted servers. If it comes from whitelisted servers, I don't need to go every request through the backbone; I could easily just IP whitelist everything. Then I could maybe have Bot Management on my infrastructure that drastically reduces the price of Cloudflare. I would like to see Push CDN more improved in the next release of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. And maybe something similar to Pushpin that Fastly has, which is an option where you can push messages that then can be scaled globally over the network. From our perspective, if we have a listener that listens for stock updates, I would just need to have one processor that pushes those updates to the Cloudflare API, and then Cloudflare would broadcast that message to all listeners. Cloudflare will check the order of the message, and if you, as a customer, are not connected or have some kind of network issue, when you reconnect, you will receive the latest state and missing updates.
ST
Senior Cybersecurity Consultant at Cyberoutcome Limited
Strong policies and bot defenses have secured critical APIs and have reduced attack noise
From my research regarding the IAM space that Imperva Application Security Platform is trying to look into, I believe they still need to do a lot of modeling and modification to make sure that also helps. There are several competitors in the IAM space, so Imperva would do well if they can do some basic modeling and modifications from my own personal research and my own experience in the IAM space. Alternatively, they could actually just focus on trying to be stronger in the web application space and the database activity monitoring space.The main reason it is not a perfect ten is regarding support. At times, having to reach the support team takes eight hours to ten hours maximum. There are times when clients could have urgent issues to attend to. The support team could do more by having a faster response rate.
JS
Hardware Engineer at Ministry of Defense
A cost-effective choice for website security and informative support with issues related to CDN quality
One area where they could improve is in providing real-time support options because now you need to open a support ticket and wait for their response. It would greatly benefit customers if they implemented an online chat or messaging system for quicker assistance. I have found their Content Delivery Network service to be lacking in quality, and it could certainly be enhanced to provide better performance. I would also like to see improvements in the deployment process, as it currently takes more time than desirable. Another significant concern is that their service when your website is down, turns it into a static site. This means that if customers try to visit your site during downtime, they will see old content from the static site, which is not ideal. The CDN and tracking services are areas that need improvement, as well as addressing their bandwidth limitations.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution does a good job of preventing web application attacks, SQL injections, and cross-site scripting attacks."
"The Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's most valuable feature is its ease of configuration."
"Cloudflare WAF provides protection through rules and functionalities like Cloudflare's SDRAP."
"Cloudflare has positively impacted my organization by making it easier for me to handle and set up DNS for multiple clients; I can easily go in and access their accounts, make changes they need, and it's a one-stop shop."
"There is a huge signature repository"
"The solution protects our application, which runs on the HTTP protocol, from DDoS attacks."
"The rate limiting features and customizations in terms of URL match and applying policies are valuable to me."
"It protects web applications efficiently."
"After moving to Imperva Application Security Platform, these attacks have been prevented significantly, and the attacks on the initial level have been considerably reduced."
"Their support team is great and you get a response/resolution within five minutes of submitting a support ticket."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is easy to configure."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is that it is easy to configure."
"Overall, I am really happy with this solution."
"My advice to anyone considering Imperva Web Application Firewall is that they can safely go to this environment without having a second thought."
"Configuration for different application sources is most valuable. We can segregate the traffic that an application is carrying and identify the sizing in Imperva."
"They're quite easy to install and quite easy to set up. Clients really like that. Especially when you're dealing with the cloud, it's really easy."
"Domain name scanning since it allows us to scan all our domain names and determine whether it has malware or if is reported as phishing."
"I use it as a WAF, which is basically a web firewall to monitor and block traffic to our web server."
"For people who own a personal website, this solution is worth trying out since their security solution is somewhat full-fledged."
"The most valuable part is the analytics and visualization."
"The initial setup was straightforward. Straight forward because the plugin can simply be installed and then it does its job. It's not complex, there is no learning curve. The online scan is simple, you put in the website address and the scan gives us a report on the browser itself. It's simple to use."
"It significantly eases the workload and streamlines the initial setup required to protect a website."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"Rather than locate some things manually, the Sucuri plugin scans and allows us to pinpoint whether there is malware or some problem in the site."
 

Cons

"The product can improve by having more multitenancy capability, which is currently not available."
"The accuracy of the Cloudflare Web Application Firewall could be improved by reducing the number of false-negative alerts."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should include port forwarding features."
"The dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should improve visibility for a customer."
"Support can be challenging at times."
"The accuracy of the Cloudflare Web Application Firewall could be improved by reducing the number of false-negative alerts."
"They need to improve their support because getting a response for basic requests took around 48 hours, which is too long."
"The hardware being more expensive compared to other vendors poses a challenge, along with a need for improvement in the cloud WAF offerings."
"I would like the solution to improve its support response time."
"We looked at CloudFlare. We tried it but it didn’t work that well."
"Caching rules are really basic now and lots of space for improvement here."
"Technical support is probably the biggest drawback."
"On the negative side, API security mainly supports cloud-based solutions, while most of my customers prefer on-prem setups, so achieving high performance with on-prem solutions would be beneficial."
"One thing that they really could improve on is the depth of the analytics."
"The price of Imperva Web Application Firewalls is expensive compared to others."
"The reason is that we have found sometimes customers or Google saying that there is something wrong with the website but Sucuri says that the site is clean so we do have to look at the site manually which means that the Sucuri scan does not pick up anything and everything."
"In terms of improvement, the cost factor is always there."
"Sucuri could provide help for specific security alerts in-line instead of requiring users to search for it in the help section."
"Confident score: Currently it does not have one and there are cases that most websites flagged are false-positives."
"The main improvement I would like to see is support for .NET applications. If they could include this feature, I would include more sites in the protection."
"I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. The reason is that we have found sometimes customers or Google saying that there is something wrong with the website but Sucuri says that the site is clean so we do have to look at the site manually which means that the Sucuri scan does not pick up anything and everything."
"Confident score: Currently it does not have one and there are cases that most websites flagged are false-positives."
"It would greatly benefit customers if they implemented an online chat or messaging system for quicker assistance."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The annual licensing fee is $10,000 USD."
"The solution is expensive."
"The pricing model is very straightforward compared to the competition. You just pay per month for the product and usage."
"We pay $210 per month for CloudFlare WAF."
"The solution's pricing option needs to be more transparent for enterprise clients."
"What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? I believe the pricing is not the best, but it's reasonable and acceptable. We also use the McAfee system in parallel. In terms of pricing, its okay - not great, but not bad either. It falls in the middle, which is acceptable. In terms of support licensing, last time, we were searching for a solution, and we considered products from resellers rather than directly from the cloud provider. However, the pricing we encountered was exceptionally high. As a result, we are inclined to select support from the reseller."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is more affordable than other solutions."
"It starts at $20 and can easily go up to $200 monthly"
"The license is on a yearly basis."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall price is higher compared to other solutions. However, everything is included in the price."
"Pricing could be more competitive."
"The tool is expensive."
"Licensing can range from one to twenty thousand dollars annually. Additionally, some features, including software support, require an annual subscription as well."
"There is a license for this solution and we purchase the license annually with no additional fees."
"​Although the pricing can be a little high, it is worth the protection and security that it offers.​"
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"It stands out as a more cost-effective option compared to other cloud-based security services like Cloudflare or JetPass."
"The ROI has been very good. Because of the solution, I have a tax break. The site developers were not always experienced people. We used to pay more for cleaning up the site when it was infected. Now, we have peace of mind knowing that the solution will clean up the site and that we won't have to go through the unnecessary process of restoring it from a backup. The protection on the WAF and the measures for backups have also prevented our site from going down."
"I’d simply say it’s really worth it."
"Sucuri offers different plans, both the standard plan and an advanced plan. So there are different plans to choose from."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business88
Midsize Enterprise25
Large Enterprise69
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall?
I don't see room for improvement to Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. One thing I don't know much about because we...
What is your primary use case for Cloudflare Web Application Firewall?
We are using Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's advanced reporting and analytics tools with their Zero Trust, so e...
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 mana...
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 provi...
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 o...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

crunchbase, udacity, marketo, okcupid, zendesk
Hitachi, BNZ, Bitstamp, Moz, InnoGames, BTCChina, Wix, LivePerson, Zillow and more.
The Loft Salon, Tom McFarlin, WPBeginner, Taylor Town, Everything Everywhere, Financial Ducks in a Row, Chubstr, Real Advice Gal, Sujan Patel, Wallao, List25, School the World
Find out what your peers are saying about Imperva Application Security Platform vs. Sucuri and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,221 professionals have used our research since 2012.