We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and Aqua Security Platform based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides a wide range of data security measures, including incident detection and detailed reporting. It also offers IAM role control and governance support. Aqua Security Platform excels in container security and on-demand patching. Users also liked its sandboxing features. Check Point CloudGuard could enhance its false positive rate and vulnerability assessments. Aqua Security Platform could reduce its resource consumption optimization while improving its log ingestion and integration with other tools.
Service and Support: Customers have generally expressed satisfaction with Check Point customer service, noting quick response times and positive support experiences, but some users say there is room for improvement. Aqua Security Platform's customer service has also been praised for being responsive and helpful, although a few users mentioned having to resolve issues on their own. Some said Aqua should provide more local support to customers in different regions.
Ease of Deployment: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management's initial setup is straightforward and quick, while Aqua Security Platform's setup can be more complex and time-consuming, especially for larger environments.
Pricing: Some regard Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management as a budget-friendly option, but others perceive it as costly. Aqua Security Platform's licensing is moderate and not based on user count, but some say the price could be lower.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides a significant return on investment by effectively addressing compliance issues and minimizing administrative work. Users have not provided feedback on Aqua Security Platform's ROI so far.
Comparison Results: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is preferred over Aqua Security Platform. Users praise Check Point for its comprehensive data protection and 360 coverage of cloud infrastructure. Check Point offers granular reporting and customizable rulesets. Aqua Security Platform users complained about the complexity of its setup processes and suggested improvements in reporting, logging, and resource consumption.
"The first thing that stood out was the ease of installation and the quick value we got out of the solution."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"Out of all the features, the one item that has been most valuable is the fact that Wiz puts into context all the pieces that create an issue, and applies a particular risk evaluation that helps us prioritize when we need to address a misconfiguration, vulnerability, or any issue that would put our environment into risk."
"The CSPM module has been the most effective. It was easy to deploy and covered all our accounts through APIs, requiring no agents. Wiz provides instant visibility into high-level risks that we need to address."
"The security baseline and vulnerability assessments is the valuable feature."
"I like Wiz's reporting, and it's easy to do queries. For example, it's pretty simple to find out how many servers we have and the applications installed on each. I like Wiz's security graph because you can use it to see the whole organization even if you have multiple accounts."
"The automation roles are essential because we ultimately want to do less work and automate more. The dashboards are easy to read and visually pleasing. You can understand things quickly, which makes it easy for our other teams. The network and infrastructure teams don't know as much about security as we do, so it helps to have a tool that's accessible and nice to look at."
"Our most important features are those around entitlement, external exposure, vulnerabilities, and container security."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and manage."
"The most helpful feature of Aqua Security is Drift Prevention, which is a feature that allows images to be immutable. In addition, one of the main reasons we went with Aqua Security is because it provides strong protection when it comes to runtime security."
"Valuable features include the ability to connect it to our Docker Hub where our images are stored, good integration with Slack, and the connection to the CV, to easily see which CVs are on each image."
"Aqua Security helps us to check the vulnerability of image assurance and check for malware."
"Their sandboxing service is also really good."
"Aqua Security allowed us to gain visibility into the vulnerabilities that were present in the container images, that were being rolled out, the amount of risk that we were introducing to the platform, and provided us a look into the container environment by introducing access control mechanisms. In addition, when it came to runtime-level policies, we could restrict container access to resources in our environment, such as network-level or other application-level access."
"The solution was very user-friendly."
"Support is very helpful."
"The feature that I value the most about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is the possibility of checking compliance with different standards. This compliance check can be performed for each subscription or service that we have on all the different cloud providers that we use."
"Good interface and visibility."
"The reporting is quite good. It is the most powerful aspect of this solution."
"It has great scalability."
"It saves time because I can look across the organization. Instead of checking 50 different accounts atomically and spending 15 minutes investigating each, I can spend 15 minutes exploring all 50 accounts. It allows me to quickly look across the org for similar problems when one comes up. That's a huge time saver."
"Helps identify and correct misconfigurations in cloud environments, ensuring that infrastructure and applications are secure and optimized."
"The posture management and remediation features are the most valuable. We use GSL Builder to build custom rules in alignment with our organization's policies. CloudGuard has canned rules using multiple standard frameworks, but we also have additional rules."
"Dome9 has improved our organization; we have a centralized view of all of our assets, our visible assets our ECs, our inventories. And then all the policies are centralized, and it is easier to manage because everything is one component console."
"Given the level of visibility into all the cloud environments Wiz provides, it would be nice if they could integrate some kind of mechanism to better manage tenants on multiple platforms. For example, let's say that some servers don't have an application they need, such as an antivirus. Wiz could include an API or something to push those applications out to the servers. It would be great if you could remedy these issues directly from the Wiz platform."
"The solution's container security could be improved."
"We wish there were a way, beyond providing visibility and automated remediation, to wait on a given remediation, due to a critical aspect, such as the cost associated with a particular upgrade... We would like to see preventive controls that can be applied through Wiz to protect against vulnerabilities that we're not going to be able to remediate immediately."
"One significant issue is that the searches are case-sensitive, so finding a misconfigured resource can become very challenging."
"The only thing that needs to be improved is the number of scans per day."
"Wiz's reporting capabilities could be refined a bit. They are making headway on that, but more executive-style dashboards would be nice. They just implemented a community aspect where you can share documents and feedback. This was something users had been requesting for a while. They are listening to customer feedback and making changes."
"The reporting isn't that great. They have executive summaries, but it's only a compliance report that maps all current issues to specific controls. Whether you look at one subscription or project, regardless of the size, you will get a multipage report on how the issues in that account map to that control. Our CSO isn't going to read through that. He won't filter that out or show that to his leadership and say, "Here's what we're doing." It isn't a helpful report. They're working on it, but it's a poor executive summary."
"The remediation workflow within the Wiz could be improved."
"Aqua Security could improve the forwarding of logging into Splunk and into other tools, it should be easier."
"We would like to see an improvement in the overview visibility that this solution offers."
"Aqua Security could provide more open documentation so that their learning resources can be more easily accessed and searched through online. Right now, a lot of the documentation is closed and not available to the public."
"There's room for improvement, particularly in management capabilities as it may not be comprehensive enough for all customers, and it has been lacking in the realm of cloud security posture management."
"In the next release, Aqua Security should add the ability to automatically send reports to customers."
"Since we are working from home, we would like to have the proper training for Aqua."
"The integrations on CICD could be improved. If Aqua had more plugins or container images to integrate and automate more easily on CICD, it would be better."
"Aqua Security lacks a lot in reporting."
"The user interface could be improved. Sometimes, the visibility is not immediately available for the environment. We have the native servers that come with the solutions, but we cannot see them in the Check Point log. Another issue is with the integrated file monitoring. It would make sense to have stuff like file integrity monitoring and malware scanning available within this module because we don't want to integrate another product."
"The Check Point Infinity admin portal sometimes freezes."
"I'd like to see more advanced encryption for local features, which is not present right now."
"The support it provides is not very good. They should improve it since we have had several setbacks due to support issues."
"Making basic rules is easy, but it's complex if you want to do something a little more nuanced. I've been unable to make some rules that I wanted. I couldn't evaluate some values or parameters of the components I look for. I haven't always been able to assess them."
"Integration could be improved."
"Adding a feature that allows me to easily identify the changes that have been made to the CIS benchmark and update my own policy accordingly would be a valuable addition to Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management."
"The technical support could be better, but I do not know of any other needed improvements."
Aqua Cloud Security Platform is ranked 12th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 16 reviews while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 7th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 60 reviews. Aqua Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.0, while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Aqua Cloud Security Platform writes "Reliable with good container scanning and a straightforward setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP writes "Threat intel integration provides us visibility in case any workload is communicating with suspicious or blacklisted IPs". Aqua Cloud Security Platform is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Snyk, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, SUSE NeuVector and Sysdig Secure, whereas Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Qualys VMDR and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks. See our Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors, best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors, and best Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security 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.
