

Acunetix and Check Point WAF compete in the web application security sector, each offering distinct strengths. Acunetix holds the advantage in continuous scanning and CI/CD integration, while Check Point WAF stands out with AI-driven threat prevention and reduced false positives.
Features: Acunetix provides mass target upload, automated vulnerability scanning, and comprehensive reporting for detailed compliance outputs. It efficiently reduces manual tasks and integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines. Check Point WAF excels in threat prevention with machine learning capabilities, offers zero-day protection, and effectively blocks OWASP Top 10 threats. It provides scalable cloud integration and automated updates to enhance security intelligence.
Room for Improvement: Acunetix users suggest improvements in API testing, handling complex authentication flows, and reducing false positives. They also seek more competitive pricing models and fine-grained scanning adjustments. Check Point WAF could improve user interface simplicity, reduce false positives, streamline policy management, and offer better pricing. Setup complexity and documentation gaps are also areas for enhancement.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix supports on-premises deployments, appealing to businesses with internal security needs. Its technical support is responsive, often praised for swift problem resolution. Check Point WAF offers flexibility with cloud and hybrid deployments, suitable for cloud-first organizations. Customer support is attentive, though response times and documentation could be improved.
Pricing and ROI: Acunetix is considered expensive but offers significant ROI through time savings and security improvements. Users suggest more competitive pricing options in light of recent licensing changes. Check Point WAF, despite being costly, provides value through its advanced features and security capabilities. Users appreciate its robustness but desire pricing more aligned with market leaders.
It saves a significant amount of time by covering attack surfaces.
I have seen a return on investment, as Acunetix helps reduce the man-days and effort needed for scanning bulk applications through automated assessments.
When we are attacked, we can understand how important the solution is.
When you migrate to the cloud, it feels like saving 90% of your time.
Most of the operations happen in the background, so I do not spend much time on it.
For high-severity issues, they reach out within two to three hours, and for critical issues, a response is received within 15 minutes.
The technical support from Invicti is very good and fast.
Support staff not being familiar with the problem.
They need to increase the number of people for 24/7 support.
They were responsive even before we committed to buying their solution.
I also received full technical support, especially during the implementation.
Acunetix can handle increasing workloads and more applications easily.
If I need to scale, I open a Whatsapp group with the director and the team, and we quickly proceed to do so.
They have sufficient resources, and there are no challenges from a scalability perspective.
Check Point CloudGuard WAF's scalability is very good.
It is very stable.
It is very stable, never crashing or giving me an error that I can see.
I did not have any issues in the last three years during which I had more than ten critical services running on CloudGuard.
The main concern is related to false positives; Acunetix needs to work on identifying valid and invalid findings.
I could supply it with maybe a Swagger file or a JSON file, and Acunetix would pick it up, scan all the endpoints according to the OWASP Top Ten, and give me remediation and actionable remediation reports.
Acunetix should have better integration with newer tools such as GitHub and Azure DevOps.
The provider could improve by providing better guidance and support during the configuration process.
Future releases should include better bot mitigation, behavioral anomaly detection, compliance templates, advanced threat intel integration, and streamlined multi-cloud support to boost protection and usability.
A machine learning-based adaptive mode could help the WAF learn over time and auto-tune policies.
The pricing cost is affordable for small and mid-sized organizations, and when compared to Checkmarx, it is significantly affordable, as Checkmarx is quite expensive.
We secured a special licensing model for penetration testing companies, which is cost-effective.
The pricing of Acunetix is pretty expensive and could be improved.
It is more expensive than f5, where we purchased everything as bundles, and Check Point costs more, but it is worth the money.
It is less costly than Cloudflare, Fortinet, and other vendors.
I know that its price is relatively expensive compared to other products but it gives benefits that are worth it.
Its most valuable role is in enhancing security by identifying potential vulnerabilities efficiently.
The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities.
The best feature Acunetix offers is the centralized dashboard and the quality of reports it generates, which includes various options for selecting reports and developer options for directly sharing the reports with developers.
Upon implementation and evaluation with third-party penetration testing, it meets rigorous security standards required for dealing with financial institutions.
It can protect against zero-day attacks and hidden anomalies.
The solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies effectively.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) | 0.9% |
| Acunetix | 2.4% |
| Other | 96.7% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 18 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 7 |
| Large Enterprise | 19 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 55 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 23 |
| Large Enterprise | 34 |
Acunetix is a dynamic application security tool used globally for web application vulnerability scanning, focusing on SQL injection and cross-site scripting.
Acunetix provides a comprehensive web vulnerability assessment platform designed for identifying and remediating security threats. Users benefit from its ability to schedule scans, boasting a fast detection rate for common vulnerabilities. The tool's centralized dashboard helps organizations with compliance monitoring and features such as crawling and login sequence enhancements, contributing depth to its security assessments. Despite high praise for its integration capabilities and automated scanning that saves time, pricing and false positives present challenges. Organizations often use Acunetix to maintain internal security and evaluate pre-release environments.
What are Acunetix's main features?In industries like finance, healthcare, and technology, Acunetix assists in protecting sensitive data through robust scanning and reporting capabilities. Its ability to perform dynamic assessments makes it a chosen tool in regulatory environments and development settings, offering both internal security inspections and pre-release evaluations.
Check Point WAF offers a robust security framework with AI-driven threat detection and seamless integration, protecting applications and APIs in multi-cloud environments.
Effective in preemptively blocking threats through AI and machine learning, Check Point WAF reduces false positives and operational workload. Its integration capabilities and threat intelligence provide comprehensive protection against zero-day attacks, while centralized management facilitates cost-effective and insightful threat reporting.
What are the main features of Check Point WAF?Check Point WAF is employed in industries securing web applications and APIs, especially in multi-cloud environments. It effectively protects backend services, prevents unauthorized access, and monitors traffic, making it suitable for businesses with diverse infrastructures. It ensures compliance with security standards and adapts to fluctuating traffic patterns.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.