AWS WAF is a web application firewall from AWS that helps protect web applications and APIs against common web exploits and bots that may affect availability, compromise security, or consume excessive resources · aws.amazon.com ↗
The standing depends on who is buying. Every model is asked the same questions for each company size.
Cloudflare WAF is first at 94%.
Cloudflare WAF is first at 85%. 0 of 14 models made it the first choice when asked directly.
Cloudflare WAF is first at 60%.
“Cloudflare or AWS WAF tend to offer the best value with solid protection”Claude Haiku 4.5 · Paraphrase question · first choice
“If your company's infrastructure is already hosted on Amazon Web Services (AWS), using AWS WAF is likely the most cost-effective path.”Qwen 3.7 Flash · Budget-constrained question · alternative
“Strong integration with CloudFront and other AWS services; cost-efficient if the application is already deeply invested in AWS.”Perplexity Sonar · Direct question · alternative
“Choose AWS WAF instead if your apps already run on AWS and your team is comfortable owning the configuration”GPT-6 Luna · Direct question · alternative
“Using the native security tools of hyperscalers like AWS WAF or Azure API Management alone... they typically lack the semantic understanding required for API-specific attacks”Qwen 3.7 Flash · Negative question · warning
“Out-of-the-box cloud WAF rules (e.g., basic default AWS WAF or Azure WAF rules) without fine-tuning either block legitimate traffic or miss application-specific flaws.”Gemini 3.5 Flash · Negative question · warning
“Relying on basic Cloud Provider WAF extensions (e.g., standard AWS WAF rules, basic Cloudflare firewall rules) as your sole bot protection.”Gemini 3.5 Flash · Negative question · warning
“avoid high licensing costs (often $5K–$50K+/year for commercial tools like Cloudflare Enterprise, AWS WAF, or Imperva)”Grok 4.20 · Budget-constrained question · warning
The products named in the same answers as AWS WAF, over the 198 answers that named it, and how often each was the first choice instead.
| Product | Named together | Picked instead | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 162 | 113 | Compare → | |
| 107 | 11 | Compare → | |
| 76 | 15 | View → | |
| 68 | 0 | View → | |
| 55 | 0 | View → | |
| 54 | 2 | Compare → | |
| 46 | 0 | View → | |
| 39 | 1 | View → | |
| 38 | 1 | Compare → | |
| 29 | 1 | View → |
What the models named instead of AWS WAF →
A side-by-side page exists where both products are among a category's top eight.
Stated on AWS WAF's own site, not checked by Gane.
Fourteen AI models from 12 labs are asked the same buying questions six ways, for three company sizes. Standings refresh every edition.
Gane sells AI visibility software. No company can pay to change a result.
Read the method →Fourteen of the fourteen models returned a source list in this edition: five return the pages they cited and nine the search results they consulted. These counts come from 154 of the 198 answers that named AWS WAF and are not a share of its labels.
428 of the 428 domain citations in answers naming AWS WAF came from a third party's page.
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Warning | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 9 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 7 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |