What does StackOptic analyze?

StackOptic runs 18 analysis modules on any public website from a single URL. It detects 7,000+ technologies (CMS, frameworks, analytics, payments, CDN, hosting), evaluates SSL certificates and HTTP security headers with grades from A+ to F, measures Core Web Vitals (LCP, CLS, TBT, FCP), audits SEO meta tags and structured data, checks email security (SPF, DKIM, DMARC), analyzes AI & LLM readiness including bot access and llms.txt validation, extracts color palettes and typography, estimates carbon footprint, and generates permanent shareable reports.

Does it work on sites behind Cloudflare or bot protection?

Yes. StackOptic uses a real browser engine that loads pages exactly like a human visitor — executing JavaScript, rendering CSS, and handling redirects. This allows it to bypass Cloudflare, LiteSpeed, Sucuri, and other bot protection systems where traditional crawlers and HTTP-only tools fail.

What do I get on the free plan?

The free plan includes 5 analyses per day with access to all 18 modules, full scores, technology detection, and security grades. Every report is permanently accessible via a unique shareable URL — no login required to view. No credit card needed. AI-powered insights, re-analysis, PDF/JSON export, and comparison features are available on Pro ($24/mo) and Agency ($99/mo) plans.

What is AI & LLM readiness analysis?

This module evaluates how visible and citable your website is to AI search engines like ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Overviews, and Claude. It audits access permissions for 8 major AI bots, validates llms.txt and llms-full.txt files, scores citation-ready content structure, and analyzes structured data (JSON-LD) for GEO readiness — helping you rank in the next generation of search.

How long does an analysis take?

Most analyses complete in under 10 seconds. StackOptic runs all 18 modules in parallel using a real browser session, so you get technology detection, security audit, performance metrics, SEO analysis, and AI readiness scoring simultaneously.

How accurate are the results?

Detection is based on real browser execution — DOM inspection, JavaScript runtime analysis, HTTP headers, and DNS records. With 7,000+ technology signatures and Lighthouse-calibrated performance scoring, StackOptic achieves high accuracy for mainstream technologies.

What security checks are performed?

The security module evaluates SSL/TLS certificates, 12+ HTTP security headers (HSTS, CSP, X-Frame-Options, Permissions-Policy, Referrer-Policy), HTTPS enforcement, and email authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC). Each site receives a letter grade from A+ to F with specific remediation steps.

Do you store the websites I analyze?

StackOptic only stores publicly available information that any visitor to a website would see — HTML content, HTTP headers, DNS records, and screenshots. We do not access private data, log in to websites, or perform any intrusive testing.

Technology Comparison

AWS WAF vs Imperva

Side-by-side comparison based on real-world adoption data from 300 detections across analyzed websites.

Market Share Distribution

AWS WAF (52%)Imperva (48%)

Total Detections

157

AWS WAF

HIGHER

143

Imperva

Websites Using

157

AWS WAF

HIGHER

143

Imperva

Used Together

websites use both

AWS WAF

Security

157 detections

157 sites

Visit Website View Profile

Imperva

Security

Imperva is a global leader in cybersecurity, providing a comprehensive suite of solutions to protect applications, data, and websites from a wide range of threats. Their offerings include web application firewalls, DDoS protection, bot management, API security, and data security.

143 detections

143 sites

Visit Website View Profile

Our Analysis

AWS WAF has a slight edge over Imperva, detected on 157 vs 143 websites. Both are in the Security category, making them direct alternatives.

Sites Using Both (0)

No sites use both technologies together.

Only AWS WAF

2k.com 500px.com accesspressthemes.com adac.de aerzteblatt.de agi.it alabama.gov audi.com babbel.com backcountry.com

Only Imperva

2checkout.com 3ds.com aa.org aaa.com aarp.org accaglobal.com accor.com accorhotels.com acs.org aetna.com

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between AWS WAF and Imperva?

AWS WAF is a web application firewall that helps protect your web applications or APIs against common web exploits that could affect application availability, compromise security, or consume excessive resources. It allows you to create custom rules to block specific attack patterns. Imperva is a global leader in cybersecurity, providing a comprehensive suite of solutions to protect applications, data, and websites from a wide range of threats. Their offerings include web application firewalls, DDoS protection, bot management, API security, and data security. Both belong to the Security category, making them direct alternatives.

Which is more popular, AWS WAF or Imperva?

Based on our analysis of real websites, AWS WAF is more widely adopted with 157 detections compared to Imperva's 143.

Can AWS WAF and Imperva be used together?

In our current dataset, no websites use both technologies simultaneously. This suggests they typically serve as alternatives rather than complementary tools.

Check Any Website's Technology Stack

Find out if a website uses AWS WAF, Imperva, or any other technology.

Analyze a Website

More Comparisons

Browse All Comparisons →