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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs HCL AppScan 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Application Security Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (14th)
HCL AppScan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (10th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 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 HCL AppScan is 2.7%, up from 2.6% 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.
Rishi Anupam - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and scalable scanning solution with good reporting feature
The solution is used for the vulnerabilities scan on the network side The reporting part is the most valuable feature. The penetration testing feature should be included. I have been using the solution for four years. It is a stable solution. I rate it seven out of ten. It is a scalable…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Whenever there was a new CVE, Check Point CloudGuard WAF used to block them."
"The portal is quite intuitive."
"From a security perspective, it is quite good."
"The DirectStorage gives me a vision that I did not have of the check that occurs on the web servers."
"I find the configuration and real-time monitoring features valuable."
"Its main value and what we liked the most is its powerful AI."
"It is a highly scalable solution with a quick turnaround time for deployment and running of the software across any IT system."
"I rate it ten out of ten."
"Compared to other tools only AppScan supports special language."
"There's extensive functionality with custom rules and a custom knowledge base."
"It highlights, with several grades of severity, the types of vulnerabilities, so we can focus on the most severe security vulnerabilities in the code."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is scanning QR codes."
"The solution offers services in a few specific development languages."
"It has certainly helped us find vulnerabilities in our software, so this is priceless in the end."
"The solution is cheap."
"We leverage it as a quality check against code."
 

Cons

"For now, the product is doing all that I need, however, I need the support of IPv6."
"We would like to have a solution of this type for the administration of applications from mobile devices."
"If the price could come down, I would be very happy with the product."
"The documentation needs to be updated, more improved, and simplified... so that even a beginner can start with this application. It can make things more beginner-friendly."
"Deeper and more transparent integration between Cloud Application Security and analysis monitoring tools could be very valuable - although the solution currently offers integrations with third-party security tools."
"You need to know exactly the system. You cannot have someone running the system if they don't have the knowledge to do so."
"The learning curve was a challenge due to initially incorrect configurations. It took approximately a month and a half to understand how the solution works because of inadequate documentation."
"Pricing and licensing are really expensive for this product. While it provides a very good security level, the price for each service is high."
"The solution's scalability can be a matter of concern because one license runs on one machine only."
"They could add a software component analysis tool."
"The dashboard, for AppScan or the Fortified fast tool, which we use needs to be improved."
"The penetration testing feature should be included."
"I would like to see the roadmap for this product. We are still waiting to see it as we have only so many resources."
"Many silly false positives are produced."
"​IBM Security AppScan Source is rather hard to use​."
"A desktop version should be added."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."
"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."
"I find the pricing to be reasonable."
"The pricing is not that expensive considering what it offers."
"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 tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."
"The product has premium pricing and could be more competitive."
"Our clients are willing to pay the extra money. It is expensive."
"AppScan is a little bit expensive. IBM needs to work a little bit on the pricing model, decreasing the license cost."
"HCL AppScan is expensive."
"I would rate the product's pricing a nine out of ten. The product's pricing is expensive compared to the features that they offer."
"The solution is cheap."
"The solution is moderately priced."
"Pricing was the main reason that we went ahead with this solution as they were the lowest in the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

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?
I am less knowledgeable with prices because I only define the requirements and look at the execution. I know that its price is relatively expensive compared to other products but it gives benefits ...
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
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 foc...
What do you like most about HCL AppScan?
The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase.
What needs improvement with HCL AppScan?
AppScan needs to improve its handling of false positives. It also requires enhancements in customer support, similar to what Veracode provides. Regularly scheduling calls with clients to discuss fe...
What is your primary use case for HCL AppScan?
The primary use case for AppScan is for security purposes. I compare AppScan with other tools such as Veracode. We use AppScan for vulnerability detection and auto-remediation of vulnerabilities wi...
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
IBM Security AppScan, Rational AppScan, AppScan
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Essex Technology Group Inc., Cisco, West Virginia University, APIS IT
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. HCL AppScan and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.