Small businessgoneNot named this edition; 0% in September 2026.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsNot ranked
F5 Advanced WAF
13Judge labels
0First choices
1Negative labels
6 / 14Models named it
2Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Standing
5 labels, too few to rank
A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. F5 Advanced WAF was named 5 times in WAF and 1 other category, where Cloudflare WAF led with 69%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.
By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small businessnot named
0%
No model named it for this buyer.
Mid-market29 of 82
0%4 labels
under the label threshold
Enterprise10 of 90
0%8 labels
under the label threshold
In waf · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named F5 Advanced WAF for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Web application firewalls | Network and edge | 0% | 29 of 82 | 25% | 4 | under 10 labels · led by Cloudflare WAF at 69% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Microsegmentation | Network and edge | 0% | 36 of 94 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by ColorTokens Xshield at 25% |
Movement
Since September 2026, F5 Advanced WAF held within the floor in all two categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · WAF · by segment
Mid-market=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 13 → 29 of 80
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
0%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 52 → 10 of 77
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WAF | 0% | 0% | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 13 → 29 of 82 |
| Microsegmentation | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 36 of 94, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated F5 Advanced WAF across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated F5 Advanced WAF across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
By framing
Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct2 labelsNone
Paraphrase3 labelsNone
Comparative6 labelsNone
Budget-constrained1 labelNone
Scale-constrained0 labelsNone
Negative1 labelNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative13 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“If you require deeper customization, stricter compliance, or you're running a hybrid environment, look at Imperva or F5” MiniMax M2.5 · WAF · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“Best-in-class protection for web services. Cons: Not a general-purpose segmentation tool” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Microsegmentation · comparative prompt · alternative
“Alternative: F5 Advanced WAF” GLM 4.7 FlashX · WAF · direct prompt · alternative
And against it
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
“Extremely powerful but notoriously difficult to tune; many companies run it in "logging only" mode due to complexity” Qwen 3.7 Flash · WAF · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as F5 Advanced WAF, over the 13 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and F5 Advanced WAF was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as F5 Advanced WAF, over the 13 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and F5 Advanced WAF was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
What carried it into the answer
The sites and pages cited by the answers that named F5 Advanced WAF. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 10 of the 13 answers that named F5 Advanced WAF and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
radware.com8
cybersecuritynews.com6
imperva.com5
openappsec.io5
csoonline.com4
fastly.com4
gartner.com4
indusface.com4
peerspot.com4
wafplanet.com4
No domain is on file for F5 Advanced WAF, so its own site is not marked.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where F5 Advanced WAF stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where F5 Advanced WAF stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 40 a month (“f5 advanced waf”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 6 a month
- Its own site
- No site of its own on file, so no site figures
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 29 of 82 in WAF
Segment leader
69%
Cloudflare WAF
- First choices
- 0 across its categories
- Named in
- 13 answers
- Its own site cited
- No site on file to match
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
Names read as F5 Advanced WAF
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as F5 Advanced WAF; a claim can dispute any of them.
F5 Advanced WAF / GTM 1
Follow F5 Advanced WAF
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
Is this your product?
Claim this page
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when F5 Advanced WAF's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as F5 Advanced WAF, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for F5 Advanced WAF by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where F5 Advanced WAF is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name F5 Advanced WAF, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.