Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs CodeSonar comparison

Check Point Software Technologies and CodeSecure are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Check Point Software Technologies is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.9, while CodeSecure is ranked #28. Check Point Software Technologies holds a 0.5% mindshare in AS, compared to CodeSecure’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Check Point Software Technologies users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 87% of CodeSecure users who would recommend it.

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Read 51 Check Point CloudGuard WAF reviews

2,502 Views
626 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

CodeSonar

Read 7 CodeSonar reviews

2,608 Views
1,800 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

CodeSonar

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

CodeSonar and Check Point CloudGuard WAF are leading solutions in the security domain. Check Point CloudGuard WAF tends to outperform due to its superior features and cloud integration capabilities.

Features: CodeSonar is valued for its ability to detect complex programming errors, comprehensive analysis tools, and competitive pricing. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is recognized for its robust threat protection, cloud service integration, and extensive security features suitable for cloud environments.

Room for Improvement: CodeSonar needs to improve GUI navigability, reduce false positives, and streamline reports for better clarity. Check Point CloudGuard WAF requires enhanced documentation, more proactive support, and optimization in setup complexity. Each has specific areas that could enhance their user experience and effectiveness.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: CodeSonar offers a straightforward setup process with responsive customer support. Check Point CloudGuard WAF, while offering thorough customer service, can be more complex to deploy due to comprehensive setups. CodeSonar's ease in deployment can be an advantage in efficient setup timelines.

Pricing and ROI: CodeSonar has competitive pricing, making it attractive to budget-conscious users, and delivers substantial ROI. Check Point CloudGuard WAF, while priced higher, offers extensive features which can lead to significant ROI when fully utilized. CodeSonar's budget-friendly approach contrasts Check Point's costlier, feature-rich investment.

To learn more, read our detailed Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. CodeSonar Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. CodeSonar

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,853 peers since 2012

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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Ranking in Application Security Tools

5th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Web Application Firewall (WAF) (9th)

CodeSonar

Ranking in Application Security Tools

28th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Code Analysis (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 0.5%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CodeSonar is 1.2%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Check Point CloudGuard WAF	0.5%
CodeSonar	1.2%
Other	98.3%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

reviewer2751468

Assistant Manager at a computer software company with 201-500 employees

Robust threat protection improves security and operational efficiency

Areas where Check Point CloudGuard WAF can improve include simple policy tuning, as the protection seems strong, though initial rule tuning can be complex. More guided workflows or templates would help speed up deployment, along with deeper integration with the DevOps pipeline, and while it handles API well, more dedicated API security would add value. In addition, it could be improved with better integration with the DevOps pipeline, more granular reporting, as the dashboards provide good high-level visibility, but sometimes digging into specific attack patterns or trends requires manual effort, and simple tuning of the ML models would be beneficial.

Read full review

Mathieu ALBRESPY

Intigration Developer at ez-Wheel

Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand

This is the first time I've used this kind of software. It was the only one we could apply to analyze with MISRA rules. At my new company, I tried to use Klocwork. I tried to use it, just once so I cannot compare it exactly with CodeSonar. I also have a plugin for my Visual Studio and I try to make it work. It's not easy, however, I don't think that we have this kind of functionality with CodeSonar. It can do some incremental analysis. However, since this feature is also available on CodeSonar, it would be a good idea to have a plugin on Visual Studio just to have a quick analysis.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"CloudGuard WAF has been great."

"It helps me sleep at night, providing peace of mind."

"With the solution, we managed to obtain complete comprehensive visibility of the entire environment in the cloud, thus having better control of each of the resources."

"The DirectStorage gives me a vision that I did not have of the check that occurs on the web servers."

"Overall, it's a good solution, and it fulfills all our core purposes, providing complete visibility and security."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF has positively impacted my organization by significantly improving both security and operational efficiency, with a noticeable reduction in web-based threats, especially automated attacks and vulnerability exploits, thanks to its real-time prevention and reputation filter that has streamlined my workflow through automatic policy updates and integration smoothly with my CI/CD pipelines, allowing my DevOps teams to deploy security without delays."

"I find the configuration and real-time monitoring features valuable."

"The solution's ability to handle multiple websites and applications without needing more expensive hardware is a key advantage."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pros

"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."

"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."

"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."

"It has been able to scale."

"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."

"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."

"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."

Cons

"For now, the product is doing all that I need, however, I need the support of IPv6."

"I do not know if it is already there, but I would like to have complete visibility between the posture management and firewall as a service."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF could be improved by simplifying the initial setup for a faster deployment, making the dashboard and reporting more customizable, and offering a more accessible pricing model."

"One of the big problems we found in Check Point, in general, is the support."

"The documentation of each of the tools that they offer needs to be better."

"I have faced issues with the tool's blocking aspects. It is hard to open or block web services due to the multitude of cloud centers. I have to do the process manually at times. We have a bug which is hard to solve."

"The learning curve was a challenge due to initially incorrect configurations."

"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."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF cons

"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."

"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."

"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."

"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."

"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."

"It was expensive."

"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."

"I work for an Indian banking client. In India, companies are on a budget. The company liked Check Point very much, but it was a little bit costly compared to FortiWeb. However, it had more features compared to FortiWeb."

"I find the pricing to be reasonable."

"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."

"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."

"The sales team or account managers from Check Point are top-notch. As I am using other products as well, my pricing was competitive compared to others."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."

"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing and cost advice

"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."

"Pricing is a bit costly."

"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,853 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

19%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Security Firm

Manufacturing Company

25%

University

12%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	32
Midsize Enterprise	19
Large Enterprise	16

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?

The setup cost was taken with the head of the department, who handled the pricing and everything.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?

Currently, there is nothing in the areas of Check Point CloudGuard WAF that I would like to see improved or enhanced in the future. If there is anything in the roadmap, I would definitely like to t...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 13% of the time

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 11% of the time

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 10% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 10% of the time

AWS WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 9% of the time

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF Competitors

SonarQube vs CodeSonar

Compared 34% of the time

Coverity Static vs CodeSonar

Compared 22% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs CodeSonar

Compared 7% of the time

Helix QAC vs CodeSonar

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Static Application Security Testing vs CodeSonar

Compared 4% of the time

More CodeSonar Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

January 2026

Download Check Point CloudGuard WAF product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

January 2026

Download CodeSonar product report

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec

No data available

Overview

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers advanced security for web applications and APIs with features such as intrusion prevention, bot prevention, and AI-driven threat detection, ensuring organizations achieve high-level protection and efficient security management.

Check Point CloudGuard WAF integrates with APIs, providing a seamless security enhancement while reducing false positives. Its scalability supports rapid deployment, valuable for companies aiming to secure resources in clouds like AWS and Azure. Enhanced threat prevention, comprehensive compliance support, and advanced threat protection methods such as SQL injection and cross-site scripting prevention are key strengths. Despite its robust capabilities, there are opportunities for improvement, such as lower costs, improved third-party tool integration, and a more intuitive interface to enhance usability.

What are the key features of Check Point CloudGuard WAF?

Intrusion Prevention System: Effectively detects and blocks unauthorized access attempts.
Bot Prevention: Shields applications from malicious bot traffic.
AI-driven Threat Detection: Uses advanced algorithms to identify and mitigate threats.
Log Management: Offers extensive logging capabilities for tracking and analysis.
Scalability: Supports rapid deployment across different environments, including multi-cloud.

What benefits should users expect from Check Point CloudGuard WAF?

Security Efficiency: Combines high-grade protection with ease of use to simplify security management.
Cost Efficiency: Aids in effective resource utilization, minimizing overhead.
Compliance Support: Helps meet various industry standards effortlessly.
Enhanced Threat Protection: Provides robust safeguards against common web vulnerabilities.

Check Point CloudGuard WAF is predominantly applied within industries requiring stringent security standards, such as financial services, healthcare, and e-commerce. Its deployment strengthens the defense of critical APIs, facilitates compliance, and supports efficient multi-cloud security management, aligning well with evolving industry demands.

Check Point Software Technologies

GrammaTech enables organizations to develop software applications more efficiently, on-budget, and on-schedule by helping to eliminate harmful defects that can cause system failures, enable data breaches, and ultimately increase corporate liabilities in today’s connected world. GrammaTech is the developer of CodeSonar, the most powerful source and binary code analysis solution available today. Extraordinarily precise, CodeSonar finds, on average, 2 times more serious defects in software than other static analysis solutions. Designed for organizations with zero tolerance for defects and vulnerabilities in their applications, CodeSonar provides static analysis for applications where reliability and security are paramount - widely used by software developers in avionics, medical, automotive, industrial control, and other mission-critical applications. Some of GrammaTech's customers include Toyota, GE, Hyundai, Kawasaki, LG, Lockheed Martin, NASA, Northrop Grumman, Panasonic, and Samsung.

CodeSecure

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. CodeSonar

December 2025

Free Report: Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. CodeSonar

Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. CodeSonar and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,853 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. CodeSonar report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.

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.