Vendor comparison
AWS WAF vs Imperva Cloud WAF: pricing compared
Cloud-native published rate versus enterprise quote-only contract. AWS WAF is a $5 web-ACL and a per-request rate card; Imperva is a year-long contract with separate Advanced Bot Protection and API Security lines. Pick by buyer motion as much as by price.
Last verified June 2026
Decision in one paragraph
AWS WAF wins on transparency, time-to-deploy, and per-request predictability. Imperva wins on Advanced Bot Protection depth, Attack Analytics reporting that auditors recognise, and the maturity of its incident-response playbook. Pick AWS WAF when AWS-native cost control matters more than depth. Pick Imperva when you need a research-led bot SKU and a named SOC team.
Side by side
AWS WAF
- Published rate: $5 web-ACL + $1/rule + $0.60/M requests + $10 Bot Control.
- Self-serve via AWS console, deploys in minutes.
- Native to ALB, CloudFront, API Gateway, App Runner, AppSync.
- Marketplace managed rule groups including from Fortinet, F5, Trustwave.
- No named SOC; you tune and operate the rule set in-house.
Imperva Cloud WAF
- Quote-only every SKU; named-account sales motion.
- Advanced Bot Protection (ex-Distil Networks) is the deep specialisation.
- Attack Analytics reporting frequently accepted as-is by PCI auditors.
- API Security and DDoS are separate paid modules that stack on the contract.
- Named SOC team and account-managed support included on Enterprise contracts.
Feature matrix
| Feature | AWS WAF | Imperva |
|---|---|---|
| Published list pricing | ✓ | ✗ |
| Per-request billing | ✓ | ✗ |
| Self-serve sign-up | ✓ | ✗ |
| Bot management published rate | ✓ | ✗ |
| Research-led bot SKU | ◐ | ✓ |
| Auditor-recognised reporting | ◐ | ✓ |
| Named SOC team | ✗ | ✓ |
| AWS-native integration | ✓ | ◐ |
Headline pricing
| Vendor | Cheapest published rate | Pricing model | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| AWS WAF | $5.00 per web-ACL per month | Per web-ACL + per rule + per million requests | Source (2026-06-19) |
| Imperva Cloud WAF | Quote only | Quote only, per-site or per-application | Source (2026-06-19) |
Direct answer
Which is cheaper at typical traffic?
At every traffic level the published AWS WAF rate is cheaper than buyer-shared Imperva bands for equivalent SKUs. The trade-off is depth: AWS WAF Bot Control is a rule group; Imperva Advanced Bot Protection is a research-led product. Compare on capability, not just price.
Source: Use the cost calculator on the homepage to model your own workload.
Switching cost
If you are already on one and considering the other
AWS-WAF-to-Imperva is heavy. Imperva fronts your origin (DNS change), terminates TLS, and runs its own managed and custom rules. Plan for 4-12 weeks of work including a parallel-run window. The reverse migration is similar in scope. Imperva contract terms typically include early-termination clauses; check before signing the AWS WAF cutover.
Where to read more
Cross-reference with the pricing-models explainer and the hidden-costs page before signing.
Last verified June 2026