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
7.7
Organizations experienced significant ROI with Check Point CloudGuard WAF, enhancing security, reducing costs, and improving NIST compliance.
Sentiment score
3.2
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
7.4
Mixed feedback on CloudGuard WAF support; praised for effectiveness but some users report delays and suggest improvements.
Sentiment score
6.8
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
8.5
Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers excellent scalability and flexibility, efficiently handling traffic and supporting multi-cloud environments seamlessly.
Sentiment score
5.4
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
8.3
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is highly stable and reliable, with minimal downtime and quick issue resolutions, crucial for finance.
Sentiment score
5.0
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 cost reduction, improved support, simpler UI, better integration, enhanced protection, and comprehensive reporting.
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

Enterprise buyers find Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing competitive despite initial costs, valuing features, support, and flexible packages.
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 offers scalable management, AI-driven security, seamless integration, reduced maintenance, and enhanced compliance with real-time alerts.
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
9th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (11th)
HCL AppScan
Ranking in Application Security Tools
15th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (15th), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 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 2.7% 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.
Sthembiso Zondi - PeerSpot reviewer
Has a straightforward setup process and valuable security features
We use AppScan primarily for security testing and performance monitoring across our systems The product's features for comprehensive code analysis (static) and live environment testing (dynamic) have significantly enhanced our ability to identify and address vulnerabilities, improving overall…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

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 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: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.