Small business=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 61 → 62 of 62
1 category · RankedImperva Cloud WAF
127Judge labels
5First choices
33Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
8% in WAF for enterprise buyers
Rank 12 of 82 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 19% of its 43 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Imperva Cloud WAF →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business8 of 75
2%28 labels
criticized challenger
Mid-market12 of 82
0%43 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise3 of 90
8%56 labels
accepted challenger
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 Imperva Cloud 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% | 12 of 82 | 19% | 43 | accepted challenger | =heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Imperva Cloud WAF held within the floor in its one category: 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 7 → 12 of 80
Enterprise▲+2Since September 2026: 7% → 9%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
9%from 7% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 3 of 77, unchanged
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 7 → 12 of 82 |
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 Imperva Cloud 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 Imperva Cloud 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 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 5 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 4 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 4 |
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
Direct24 labels2
Paraphrase25 labels1
Comparative31 labels5not counted in share
Budget-constrained10 labels1
Scale-constrained19 labels1
Negative18 labels2not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative127 labels in all, every segment counted; 5 of the 12 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.
“Leaders like Imperva/Cloudflare excel in accuracy (98-99%) and low false positives/negatives” Grok 4.20 · WAF · comparative prompt · first choice
“Best for: Enterprises needing robust, enterprise-grade security with strong bot detection and real-time threat intelligence” Mistral Small · WAF · comparative prompt · alternative
“Enterprises needing advanced bot management and API protection typically choose Akamai, Imperva, or Fastly Next-Gen WAF.” Muse Glimmer 30B · WAF · paraphrase prompt · alternative
“Choose Imperva if you need strong enterprise controls, low false positives, or hybrid deployment flexibility” Perplexity Sonar · 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.
“Solutions like Imperva and F5 require dedicated security teams to maintain rules... they can become security theater.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · WAF · negative prompt · soft negative
“This is the BreakingWAF condition for Akamai, Cloudflare, Fastly, Imperva and similar CDN-WAF combos.” Muse Glimmer 30B · WAF · negative prompt · soft negative
“Imperva scored surprisingly low on true positive detection despite low false positives.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · WAF · direct prompt · soft negative
“skip Akamai/Imperva unless you have enterprise budgets and complex hybrid requirements” Kimi K2 · WAF · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Imperva Cloud WAF, over the 127 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Imperva Cloud WAF was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Imperva Cloud WAF, over the 127 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Imperva Cloud 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 Imperva Cloud 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 114 of the 127 answers that named Imperva Cloud WAF and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
radware.com71
imperva.comYour site55
openappsec.io47
wafplanet.com43
cybersecuritynews.com39
comparitech.com34
checkpoint.com31
geekflare.com31
indusface.com31
guideflow.com30
357 of the 412 domain citations in answers naming Imperva Cloud WAF came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
imperva.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Imperva Cloud WAF takes 0% of first choices and Cloudflare WAF takes 69%.ShowHide
Search and answers
imperva.com is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Imperva Cloud WAF takes 0% of first choices and Cloudflare WAF takes 69%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “web application firewall”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “web application firewalls”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 90 a month (“imperva cloud waf”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 2 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 417,309 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 20,176 · 3,001 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 21,050
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
Ads on Google
None found in Google's ad transparency records for the US
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
0%
rank 12 of 82 in WAF
Segment leader
69%
Cloudflare WAF
- First choices
- 5 across its categories
- Named in
- 127 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 114 of the answers that named it
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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on imperva.com
2,657
subdomains included
Content
2,319
counted in the table below
Documentation
0
Product · Integration
70 · 7
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blog | 1,714 | undated | WAF, DDoS | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 309 | undated | CDN, DLP | ||
| Report or ebook | 208 | 0 | 2018-04-01 | WAF, DDoS | |
| Case study | 50 | undated | |||
| Webinar or virtual event | 10 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 10 | undated | |||
| Conference or event | 8 | undated | |||
| Template or tool | 8 | undated | |||
| Podcast or video | 1 | undated | |||
| News or press | 1 | undated |
Most recent
- 2018-04-01Threatradar subscription services report or ebook
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page imperva.com exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Imperva Cloud WAF
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Imperva Cloud WAF; a claim can dispute any of them.
Imperva 25Imperva WAF 8Akamai/Imperva 1Imperva (Cloud WAF) 1Imperva (WAF + Bot Defense) 1Imperva (formerly Incapsula) 1Imperva (now Thales) 1Imperva (now part of Thales) 1Imperva (part of Thales) 1
Follow Imperva Cloud 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.
The company
Imperva Cloud WAF is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Imperva Cloud WAF is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Instantly secure applications from the latest threats
- Price stated
- Pricing varies based on customer needs. Contact for a custom quote. imperva.com
- Free plan or trial
- Start for Free imperva.com
- Customers named
- TowerSmallpdfQuálitasBanco PopularDiscovery Inc.BSELeading Financial Services CompanySDIS 62
- Not stated on the pages read
- Who it is for, starting price, integrations, certifications, hosting
What Imperva Cloud WAF's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: imperva.com, imperva.com/products/plans, imperva.com/resources/customers, imperva.com/partners. A claimed page can correct any of them.
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 Imperva Cloud 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 Imperva Cloud 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 Imperva Cloud WAF by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Imperva Cloud 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 Imperva Cloud 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.