Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Contrast Security Assess comparison

Check Point Software Technologies and Contrast Security are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Check Point Software Technologies is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.8, while Contrast Security is ranked #26 with an average rating of 8.0. Check Point Software Technologies holds a 0.3% mindshare in AS, compared to Contrast Security’s 0.8% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Check Point Software Technologies users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Contrast Security users who would recommend it.

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Read 48 Check Point CloudGuard WAF reviews

1,844 Views
443 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Read 11 Contrast Security Assess reviews

1,313 Views
827 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Contrast Security Assess

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Contrast Security Assess and Check Point CloudGuard WAF compete in the security tools category. Check Point CloudGuard WAF seems to have the upper hand with its superior features highlighted in user reviews, despite a more complex deployment process.

Features: Contrast Security Assess offers strong application security insights, seamless integration capabilities, and ease of use. Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides comprehensive threat protection, high flexibility across various environments, and an array of advanced features catering to wider security needs.

Room for Improvement: Contrast Security Assess could improve in reporting, analytics, and in-depth threat detection. Check Point CloudGuard WAF would benefit from enhancing customization, refining alerting features, and simplifying user interface complexity.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Contrast Security Assess is favored for simple setup and responsive support. Check Point CloudGuard WAF has a complex deployment but is backed by reliable customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Contrast Security Assess is budget-friendly, offering good ROI and manageable startup costs. Check Point CloudGuard WAF requires a higher investment but delivers a higher perceived ROI due to its advanced security capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Contrast Security Assess Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Contrast Security Assess

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,566 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

7th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Web Application Firewall (WAF) (10th)

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Application Security Tools

26th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (27th)

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 0.8%, up from 0.5% 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	0.3%
Contrast Security Assess	0.8%
Other	98.9%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Dialungana Malungo

Principal Cybersecurity Specialist at Unitel S.A.

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.

Read full review

ToddMcAlister

Lead Application and Data Security Engineer at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees

It has an excellent API interface to pull APIs.

Assess has brought our development time down because it helps create code the first time. Instead of going through the Jenkins process to build an application, they can see right off the bat that if there are errors in the code and fix them before it even goes to build.

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

"It is a very scalable and stable solution."

"The solution offers sophisticated security techniques with unique characteristics that can be particularly valuable for the financial sector, which is where we develop apps."

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

"The tool's most valuable feature is AI, which makes operations easier. Moreover, it is easy to deploy."

"The features I have found most valuable are the comprehensive threat prevention capabilities, automated policy management, and seamless integration with cloud environments."

"The tool helps us to block IPs and applications."

"We have saved money by protecting our environment from new vulnerabilities and preventing theft by cybercriminals."

"It seamlessly protects through machine learning, giving us visibility into potential attacks and where they come from."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pros

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

"The accuracy of the solution in identifying vulnerabilities is better than any other product we've used, far and away. In our internal comparisons among different tools, Contrast consistently finds more impactful vulnerabilities, and also identifies vulnerabilities that are nearly guaranteed to be there, meaning that the chance of false positives is very low."

"It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product."

"Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."

"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

"No other tool does the runtime scanning like Contrast does. Other static analysis tools do static scanning, but Contrast is runtime analysis, when the routes are exercised. That's when the scan happens. This is a tool that has a very unique capability compared to other tools. That's what I like most about Contrast, that it's runtime."

"I am impressed with the product's identification of alerts and vulnerabilities."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

Cons

"The web user interface needs some improvement, even though the functionality is good."

"Pricing is high, although possibly justified by the service received."

"They should improve in the delivery of more detailed reports with more information."

"I advise proactive threat detection intelligence offline, which can also help monitor and ensure system checks and compliances are in place."

"I have encountered issues with Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's technical support. It also has missing configuration features."

"The reporting can be improved."

"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."

"They might be able to add more integrations."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF cons

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"Contrast Security Assess covers a wide range of applications like .NET Framework, Java, PSP, Node.js, etc. But there are some like Ubuntu and the .NET Core which are not covered. They have it in their roadmap to have these agents. If they have that, we will have complete coverage."

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"The product's retesting part needs improvement. The tool also needs improvement in the suggestions provided for fixing vulnerabilities. It relies more on documentation rather than on quick fixes."

"The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective."

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

"Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side."

"The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"As Infiniti customers, the pricing is manageable, as we have allowances dedicated to each Check Point product. The price is not as high compared to other options I have dealt with in the past."

"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."

"The base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."

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

"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"

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

"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing and cost advice

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"The solution is expensive."

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

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

869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

20%

Manufacturing Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

Government

Financial Services Firm

23%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	25
Midsize Enterprise	18
Large Enterprise	16

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	6

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?

I don't know about the pricing, setup cost, or licensing for Check Point CloudGuard WAF, as I don't manage costs.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?

Check Point CloudGuard WAF can be improved; initially, the setup is very complicated, and there's not a lot of documentation available, plus it didn't have something for anti-bot, but other than th...

See all answers

What do you like most about Contrast Security Assess?

When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Contrast Security Assess?

Technical support for the solution should be faster. We have to further analyze what kind of CVEs are in the reported libraries and what part of the code is affected. That analysis can be added to ...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Contrast Security Assess?

Contrast Security Assess is deployed on-cloud in our organization. I would recommend Contrast Security Assess to other users. It's a really good tool. It provides lots of details on web-based vulne...

See all answers

Comparisons

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 19% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 14% of the time

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 12% of the time

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 11% of the time

open-appsec vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 10% of the time

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF Competitors

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 21% of the time

Seeker Interactive vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 14% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 10% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

Qualys Web Application Scanning vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

October 2025

Download Check Point CloudGuard WAF product report

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

October 2025

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Also Known As

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

Contrast Assess

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

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Contrast Security

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Contrast Security Assess

September 2025

Free Report: Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Contrast Security Assess

Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Contrast Security Assess and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Contrast Security Assess 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.