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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.3
Organizations achieve up to 90% ROI with Check Point CloudGuard WAF, benefiting from enhanced security, cost savings, and efficiency.
Sentiment score
2.1
HCL AppScan enhances architecture with fewer errors and improved security, achieving 50% return and 20% cost savings.
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
6.8
Check Point CloudGuard WAF customer support is generally effective but needs improvement in response times and availability.
Sentiment score
5.4
HCL AppScan's support is responsive with mixed reviews, facing regional challenges and lagging behind competitors like Veracode.
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.
Veracode provides excellent assistance and regularly scheduled calls to address customer concerns and updates.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is highly scalable, effectively handles increased traffic, and benefits from traffic-based licensing and strong support.
Sentiment score
4.9
HCL AppScan is scalable yet varies by license, integration issues, infrastructure compatibility, and CI/CD pipeline design effectiveness.
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.
It handles increasing traffic easily because we can extend our demands based on our needs.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is highly stable, offering robust performance and minimal downtime with rare disruption instances.
Sentiment score
6.8
HCL AppScan is stable and reliable, with minor hardware issues, improved by recent upgrades enhancing performance and stability.
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.
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point CloudGuard WAF needs interface, monitoring, documentation, pricing improvements, AI integration, easier setup, and enhanced mobile protection.
HCL AppScan requires improvements in vulnerability detection, usability, integration, performance, support, pricing, and language/codebase compatibility to stay competitive.
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.
 

Setup Cost

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers flexible, subscription-based pricing with competitive features, though costs can exceed alternatives like Azure WAF and FortiWeb.
HCL AppScan is considered expensive but cost-effective, with varied pricing opinions influenced by its premium features and discounts.
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.
Companies often choose based on budget constraints, with Veracode being on the higher end cost-wise.
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides advanced security, easy integration, AI threat detection, and compliance, enhancing control and visibility.
HCL AppScan detects vulnerabilities, integrates with agile processes, offers scalability, user-friendly features, and AI-enhanced rapid scanning for security.
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.
AppScan's most valuable features include its ability to identify vulnerabilities accurately, provide detailed remediation steps, and the newly introduced AI-powered features that enhance its functionality further.
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Application Security Tools
7th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (10th)
HCL AppScan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (15th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 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 HCL AppScan is 2.5%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Check Point CloudGuard WAF0.3%
HCL AppScan2.5%
Other97.2%
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.
Gladwin Christian - PeerSpot reviewer
A useful tool to scan applications that can be easily installed
Given that we have been using HCL AppScan for many years, I think the setup process is not difficult at all. Sometimes, some issues stop or prevent my company from moving forward with the product's setup phase. We have to call HCL's support team and engage in long discussions to smoothly carry out the setup phase. In general, the product's setup phase is not difficult in our company. The solution is deployed on an on-premises model. The licenses for the solution are available only on cloud deployments nowadays. The solution is already installed in our environment. Every time a new release or software comes out from HCL, our company does a scan, which takes maybe a day or two.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business25
Midsize Enterprise18
Large Enterprise16
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise31
 

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 don't know about the pricing, setup cost, or licensing for Check Point CloudGuard WAF, as I don't manage costs.
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...
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: September 2025.
867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.