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

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs NGINX App Protect comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.5
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP boosts efficiency, reduces workload, and delivers 35%-70% ROI through improved security and reduced compliance efforts.
Sentiment score
6.9
Organizations saw positive ROI with NGINX App Protect during COVID-19, improving security and integration, anticipating future benefits.
Monitoring cloud security automatically ensures a return on investment.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.0
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP support is praised for responsiveness and knowledge, though some seek improvement at the basic level.
Sentiment score
6.3
NGINX App Protect support is praised for promptness and helpfulness but inconsistencies and costs affect user satisfaction.
When I need help or have open questions, or if I require the capability to deploy a quick test environment, there are always people I can contact at Check Point to get my information or the environment as fast as I need it.
I have a dedicated support engineer and a presales engineer dedicated to me.
They were quick and efficient when we had issues.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is scalable and adaptable, integrating well into multi-cloud systems despite potential licensing cost considerations.
Sentiment score
6.5
NGINX App Protect is scalable with diverse options but faces deployment, traffic, and configuration centralization challenges noted by users.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is praised for its stable performance, reliable workload management, and seamless cloud integration with minimal downtime.
Sentiment score
8.4
NGINX App Protect is praised for stability and integration, outperforming competitors, though minor improvements in HTML5 are needed.
It is rapidly evolving, and sometimes mistakes occur, necessitating testing.
If there are errors, it is sometimes challenging to elaborate or troubleshoot since it is not transparent enough to understand what to search for.
It is a quality solution, and I would rate its stability as eight out of ten.
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP requires better integration, improved features, enhanced support, and comprehensive documentation with robust automation and customization.
NGINX App Protect requires improved flexibility, UI, API, automation, network support, pricing, integration, and feature enhancements like security and documentation.
I need more integration from the code-to-cloud principle.
It would be nice to have periodic updates on what people should do, maybe with some analysis or something.
I require consistency in the user interface to ensure everything is streamlined into the same look and feel.
There was more information from F5 regarding hardware requirements and specifications to deploy the service.
 

Setup Cost

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP licenses by cloud assets with annual/hourly terms; opinions vary on pricing and flexibility.
NGINX App Protect costs $3,000-$400,000 annually, considered expensive but competitive, with no hidden fees and strategic cost management possible.
From a licensing and cost perspective, it is really competitive.
It is not cheap, of course, yet it is a necessity.
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP excels in cloud security with IAM control, compliance monitoring, visualization, and seamless multi-cloud integration.
NGINX App Protect provides comprehensive security features including automation, containerization, and flexible API connectivity for robust application protection.
The CDR helps detect anomalous behavior and respond to threats before they become an issue.
One of the main reasons we use the solution is that it is great at identifying risks that are critical to our business.
Detecting misconfigurations in the cloud is what the CSPM delivers.
The most valuable feature is the ability to operate in a DevOps environment and to be configured through API and pipeline by the developers themselves.
Detecting bots and blocking IPs have proven effective for securing applications.
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP
Ranking in Container Security
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (9th), Cloud and Data Center Security (9th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (5th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (5th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (5th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (6th), Compliance Management (6th)
NGINX App Protect
Ranking in Container Security
22nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (16th), API Security (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is 2.0%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NGINX App Protect is 0.2%, down from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Bart Coddens - PeerSpot reviewer
Evolved cloud security with active monitoring but needs interface consistency
The user interface needs work. Sometimes, it is a transition from the old tool to the new CNAPP Two that I currently have, and remnants of the old environment can still be detected. I require consistency in the user interface to ensure everything is streamlined into the same look and feel. More work is needed in fine-tuning the threat data towards your CSPM and activity logs, aligning them with business intelligence, which requires a cohesive console interface. My assessment of CloudGuard CDRs in intrusion detection and threat hunting capabilities is that it still needs some work. All the threat data that comes in, you need to fine tune it a bit.
Tomaz Sobczak - PeerSpot reviewer
Signature-based detection, DOS protection, and bot protection
NGINX App Protect is easier to automate and configure, or manage from an API. This is good for securing applications. However, it's not suitable for more complex tasks. NGINX App Protect positively impacted performance changes. There's a cache or it works like a proxy, so it can speed up applications. It can also offload some functions from servers, which NGINX can handle faster.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
5%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NGINX App Protect?
I don't know the pricing yet because in my other project, I was not part of the buying side and I was just starting to look at options.
What needs improvement with NGINX App Protect?
It would be better if it were easier to implement and if there was more information from F5 regarding hardware requirements and specifications to deploy the service, to avoid disruptions after impl...
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Dome9, Check Point CloudGuard Workload Protection, Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence
NGINX WAF, NGINX Web Application Firewall
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Symantec, Citrix, Car and Driver, Virgin, Cloud Technology Partners
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. NGINX App Protect and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.