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

Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall vs Radware Cloud WAF Service comparison

Sponsored
 

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

Cloudflare Web Application ...
Sponsored
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ivanti Virtual Web Applicat...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
44th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (17th)
Radware Cloud WAF Service
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is 3.8%, down from 5.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Radware Cloud WAF Service is 1.6%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Radware Cloud WAF Service1.6%
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall3.8%
Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall0.9%
Other93.7%
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.
MD
Consultant at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
Good feature set and is simple to deploy
In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered. We've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else. We sort of stopped deploying them because of that. There are additional costs to the standard licensing. There are bandwidth prices. The feature set is quite good. We've been told to stop using them because of the price. If they can do something to address that I believe it would be better. On the latest version they've got a community edition, which is quite a good bandwidth, but in essence, it's to address the entry-level price. When you get to 10 gig bandwidth, it's way too expensive.
AT
SOC Analyst at Adani Enterprises Ltd
Has significantly improved threat visibility and reduced false positives through intelligent bot detection and real-time analysis
The best features of Radware Cloud WAF Service that I prefer most include the bot protection. Its deployment was very smooth and flexible when I started deploying it. The reporting and visibility feature of the Bot Manager are noteworthy, as the dashboard gives clear insight into the traffic, activity, and block threats. The AI threat intelligence feature is quite impressive. In terms of blocking unknown threats and attacks, I assess Radware Cloud WAF Service as quite impressive; if I have to rate it out of 10, I would rate it eight and a half. The automated analytics for looking at events with Radware Cloud WAF Service is generally fine, and whenever we use it, it gives almost perfect results. In API protection with Radware Cloud WAF Service, we have multiple applications that we are using currently, and whenever there is any threat related to an API, it helps us provide detailed insight. Additionally, whenever there is unusual API traffic, it helps us monitor and detect threats.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Some of the most valuable features of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall include its DNS zone setup and the zero trust policy."
"I'm highly satisfied. It's remarkably user-friendly, enabling me to quickly identify issues, and deploy solutions, and it offers the necessary features."
"I have not had any issues with this solution, and I would recommend it to others who are interested in using it."
"It is a SaaS solution unlike much of the competition."
"We like that there's load balancing, firewall capabilities, DDoS protection, et cetera, all covered by Cloudflare."
"It is configurable via API."
"Very glad the WAF rulesets works out of box, and requires very little tuning or maintenance."
"It protects web applications efficiently."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that it is simple to deploy. The deployment took us ten minutes."
"With the current visibility dashboard, we can now obtain insight into the nature of attacks, identify attackers, and detect top IP or threat regions."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service offers better protection and can even provide significantly better security."
"We feel safe using Radware, and we are happy with it."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service is very good, and there are various features such as DDoS for blocking mass attacks."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service has positively impacted our organization by giving us peace of mind with suspicious traffic, fewer web security concerns on public services, and more confidence in the protection of our applications."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service is quite effective for blocking unknown threats and attacks, and it has the capability to analyze behavioral patterns, which allows them to implement preventive measures."
"Our environment is safe due in part to behavior and anomaly detection, which provides IP-based, subnet-based, and country-based blocking."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service has positively impacted my organization by providing peace of mind for the team and regulatory compliance, since having the application properly protected meets our banking field requirements."
 

Cons

"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should improve visibility for a customer."
"I have experienced some difficulties with Cloudflare's support as a customer based in India."
"A key challenge arises when dealing with numerous integrations with HVAC systems. Depending on the specifics, there might be some configuration mismatches, which necessitate specific support."
"The product can improve by having more multitenancy capability, which is currently not available."
"The dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"The user interface is very simple and straightforward, but users need knowledge about DNS to accomplish tasks."
"It would be ideal if the solution offered better log integration and more integration with different platforms."
"The platform's control features related to real-time authentication and response time need improvement."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered. We've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else."
"Radware Cloud WAF Service could improve by possibly offering greater availability in Spanish for support, as generally there are English-speaking engineers, which might represent a challenge for some people."
"API integration and documentation need to be improved. There should be more detailed documentation for API usage, rate limiting, CNAME, and DDoS functions. A lot of articles need to be added to their portal."
"It would be ideal if Radware could offer a bundled package that includes Cloud WAF, web DDoS protection, bot manager, and Alteon for a more comprehensive security solution."
"The reporting features could be more intuitive with more real-time monitoring, which would help make faster decisions."
"The dashboard needs improvement as some users find it complex."
"The only improvement I have directly for Radware is its costs, because they are very high."
"Some of the tools are a bit difficult to navigate, and the user interface could be more user-friendly."
"In Radware Cloud WAF Service, the areas that have room for improvement include the costing part, as we faced some issues during the implementation and POC of this WAF technology."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not too pricey."
"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 offers different types of subscriptions for businesses, enterprises, and personal users, and the pricing is negotiable."
"It starts at $20 and can easily go up to $200 monthly"
"The pricing model is very straightforward compared to the competition. You just pay per month for the product and usage."
"The annual licensing fee is $10,000 USD."
"The solution is expensive."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is more affordable than other solutions."
Information not available
"I am not directly involved in pricing and setup cost discussions, but it seems that Radware offers a more cost-effective solution compared to F5. It is considered a good value for our budget."
"If you plan to deploy Cloud WAF, keep in mind that the product is priced based on the megabits of traffic that pass through and the number of transactions. You should get your requirements correct up front. The active attackers feed and CDN services cost extra, so you need to negotiate these features upfront."
"I believe the prices are fair."
"The pricing is fair."
"We evaluated other options and, if I remember correctly, one of them was Fortinet, but they didn't seem as effective as Radware. But the price was the biggest difference. Radware had the best price for our type of network and level of scaling."
"The price is a bulk average."
"We are based in El Salvador and don't have a direct license with Radware; we purchase the license through resellers. The pricing is reasonable, as I managed an Akamai product in a previous position, and Cloud WAF is competitively priced."
"When compared to Akamai and F5, Radware's pricing and licensing are highly competitive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Construction Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Performing Arts
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise45
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Radware Cloud WAF Service?
The cost of Radware Cloud WAF Service is actually a bit high, but given all these benefits, the investment makes sense.
What needs improvement with Radware Cloud WAF Service?
To improve Radware Cloud WAF Service, I believe it should enable full application and API coverage to ensure all web ...
What is your primary use case for Radware Cloud WAF Service?
My main use case for Radware Cloud WAF Service is protection against OWASP Top 10 and zero-day attacks, API discovery...
 

Also Known As

Cloudflare WAF
Pulse vWAF, Pulse Virtual Traffic Manager
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

crunchbase, udacity, marketo, okcupid, zendesk
Gilt Groupe
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Imperva, Fortinet, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.