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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Checkmarx One comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 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
7.6
Organizations saw up to 90% ROI from improved security, reduced costs, and operational efficiencies with Check Point CloudGuard WAF.
Sentiment score
7.5
Organizations saw ROI with Checkmarx One via improved development speed, cost savings, and enhanced security, despite quantification challenges.
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.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Check Point CloudGuard WAF's support is praised for expertise, though some suggest improving response times and extending support hours.
Sentiment score
7.1
Checkmarx One offers fast, expert support, though some users note resolution delays and additional support charges.
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.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.5
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is praised for scalability, efficiently supporting diverse workloads and seamless expansion across cloud environments.
Sentiment score
7.1
Checkmarx One excels in scalability, integration, and automation, efficiently managing various organizational sizes though licensing can be restrictive.
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.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is highly stable and reliable, with minimal interruptions and excellent performance across environments.
Sentiment score
7.2
Checkmarx One is reliable with some performance issues during large scans; user ratings vary from six to ten.
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.
I would rate the stability of this solution a nine on a scale of 1 to 10 where one is low stability and 10 is high.
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point CloudGuard WAF requires cost reduction, better integration, improved UI, enhanced support, and clearer pricing models.
Checkmarx One needs enhanced false positive reduction, language support, CD integration, pricing, UI, reporting, and automation improvements.
The provider could improve by providing better guidance and support during the configuration process.
It's not something you manipulate, it's not an antivirus where you deal with signatures, updates, and upgrades every day.
I would say that the more automation this product has, the easier it will be to work with it.
It could suggest how the code base is written and automatically populate the source code with three different solution options to choose from.
 

Setup Cost

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers competitive pricing with flexible licensing, though costs can be higher and complex when scaling.
Checkmarx One offers high quality and performance, though its pricing varies and is often seen as expensive yet competitive.
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.
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers seamless integration, scalability, AI-powered security, and visibility, excelling in protection and cost-efficiency.
Checkmarx One provides comprehensive vulnerability analysis with intuitive features, efficient reporting, CI/CD integration, and extensive language support.
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.
My experience with the initial setup of Checkmarx One is straightforward; it is not complex compared to other tools that I have tried.
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Application Security Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (11th)
Checkmarx One
Ranking in Application Security Tools
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Vulnerability Management (24th), Static Code Analysis (3rd), API Security (5th), DevSecOps (4th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Checkmarx One is 10.0%, down from 14.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Syed Hasan - PeerSpot reviewer
Partner experiences excellent technical support and seamless initial setup
In my opinion, if we are able to extract or show the report, and because everything is going towards agent tech and GenAI, it would be beneficial if it could get integrated with our code base and do the fix automatically. It could suggest how the code base is written and automatically populate the source code with three different solution options to choose from. This would be really helpful.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What alternatives are there for Fortify WebInspect and Fortify SCA?
I would like to recommend Checkmarx. With Checkmarx, you are able to have an all in one solution for SAST and SCA as well. Veracode is only a cloud solution. Hope this helps.
What do you like most about Checkmarx?
Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Checkmarx?
The pricing is relatively expensive due to the product's quality and performance, but it is worth it.
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
YIT, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, SAP, U.S. Army, Liveperson, Playtech Case Study: Liveperson Implements Innovative Secure SDLC
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Checkmarx One and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.