Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 1, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
33rd
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
11th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service is 0.9%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 1.7%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Hadar Eshel - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to install platform with valuable policy management features
We use the product for securing email systems, protecting websites, and safeguarding web-based applications and portals One significant area for improvement in Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service lies in its market positioning and pricing strategy. Additionally, it could operate in a local data center.…
Dialungana Malungo - PeerSpot reviewer
Protects our web applications and APIs and has a very low false positive rate
CloudGuard WAF is a very straightforward solution. I do not have to worry about signatures. Most of the solutions that are out there are mainly based on signatures, and I have to do a lot of maintenance to get the signature updates, and sometimes, due to a lack of resources, I am not able to do so. With CloudGuard WAF, I have peace of mind, because most of the features are AI-based, and there is not much configuration that needs to be done on my side. Once set, I only go to CloudGuard WAF to check. I do not have to worry about signatures or updates. Everything is done perfectly, and I have a sense of peace because I know our applications are safe. It is very important for us that CloudGuard WAF protects our applications against threats without relying on signatures. That is definitely one of the key features I need.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The product's bot protection feature is valuable for our company."
"I like its ability to identify known attacks, including DDOS attacks. It's valuable because software must be able to stop known attacks. Application attacks are evolving all the time. When it comes to software-as-a-service, we need to have software that knows about all the latest attacks. It should also protect against major unknown attacks."
"The most valuable features of the solution are it is plug and play, has automated policies, a simple configuration, and is easy to create rules."
"It provides an ease of policy management."
"The solution can be used for threat prevention or as a cloud-to-cloud backup system"
"It offers high performance and improved productivity for users."
"The integration with other Microsoft products, especially Visual Studio, is seamless."
"Overall, the product is excellent."
"It seamlessly protects through machine learning, giving us visibility into potential attacks and where they come from."
"The portal is quite intuitive."
"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security helped reduce the cost of ownership for our web application firewall by 50%."
"Machine learning is a valuable tool for this assessment because it allows for a two-phase approach: secure and non-secure."
"The ability to preemptively block zero day attacks and detect hidden anomalies is exactly its advantage."
 

Cons

"The stability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The solution can improve by bundling Security Operation Center (SOC) with the WAF-as-a-Service, it would provide a lot more value to customers."
"We found it a bit slow when accessing it through the web browser. The URL also exposed the user name and the hashed password. When I log into my Barracuda WAF user portal, I could see the username and the hashed password on the URL itself. So, it is not very secure, and it is important to take that off."
"One significant area for improvement in Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service lies in its market positioning and pricing strategy."
"It's a very specific solution that is only requested for a customer's web code or their global IT policy."
"They should improve in the delivery of more detailed reports with more information."
"The learning curve was a challenge due to initially incorrect configurations."
"I would like it to be able to analyze more complex functions, although I did not examine the case study of more complex implementations. Things like forum fields, etc seem to need a little more focused protection of the fields scheme validation."
"I am pretty happy with the current version. I have not yet used it to its full potential, but there could be improvements as I explore it further."
"CloudGuard could improve in areas such as ease of integration with Fortinet and reducing costs associated with deployment in cloud environments like Azure."
"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."
"I advise proactive threat detection intelligence offline, which can also help monitor and ensure system checks and compliances are in place."
"The web user interface needs some improvement, even though the functionality is good."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high. There are no additional costs to be paid apart from the standard licensing fees attached to the solution."
"It's very difficult for me to give an estimate of the cost. All I know is that we sell the box itself as a service."
"The product is expensive but it offers flexible pricing. It could be affordable."
"The base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."
"If the pricing for the Infinity platform covers everything, it would be more straightforward. I had a hard time selling it to our CEO as a former CFO because of the differentials. There are different deltas year to year over a five-year period. It is very difficult to explain. It would be easier to digest for our executives if there was a flatter scale"
"The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."
"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."
"I find the pricing to be reasonable."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Government
14%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service?
One significant area for improvement in Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service lies in its market positioning and pricing strategy. Additionally, it could operate in a local data center. This limitation hinder...
What is your primary use case for Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service?
We use the product for securing email systems, protecting websites, and safeguarding web-based applications and portals.
What do you like most about CloudGuard for Application Security?
We have not had any incidents. We could realize its benefits immediately. We watched and monitored the traffic, and it was amazing to see the results.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
The pricing can be a bit complex to understand initially. It can be challenging to estimate costs, especially when scaling our usage.
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
The pricing can be a bit complex to understand initially. It can be challenging to estimate costs, especially when scaling our usage. Also, while the documentation is comprehensive, it can be diffi...
 

Also Known As

Barracuda WAF as a Service
Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Salvation Army
Orange España, Paschoalotto
Find out what your peers are saying about Barracuda WAF-as-a-Service vs. Check Point CloudGuard WAF and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.