Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Kiuwan comparison

Check Point Software Technologies and Kiuwan are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Check Point Software Technologies is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.9, while Kiuwan is ranked #29. Check Point Software Technologies holds a 0.5% mindshare in AS, compared to Kiuwan’s 1.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Check Point Software Technologies users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of Kiuwan 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

Kiuwan

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

1,808 Views
1,464 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Kiuwan

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Kiuwan and Check Point CloudGuard WAF are strong contenders in software security and web application firewall protection. Check Point CloudGuard WAF appears to have the upper hand in terms of features, while Kiuwan is more appealing to budget-conscious buyers due to its pricing and support advantages.

Features: Kiuwan offers easy integration, effective vulnerability identification, and straightforward deployment. Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides extensive threat intelligence capabilities, scalability, and a broad range of protections.

Room for Improvement: Kiuwan could enhance customization options, expand reporting features, and improve user interface design. Check Point CloudGuard WAF might focus on simplifying its setup process, improving UI intuitiveness, and reducing the learning curve for new users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kiuwan is known for straightforward deployment and responsive customer support, with faster resolution times. Check Point CloudGuard WAF, despite being highly functional, receives varied feedback on deployment complexity, and users report a more intricate support experience.

Pricing and ROI: Kiuwan is noted for competitive pricing and favorable setup costs, offering good ROI for small to medium enterprises. Check Point CloudGuard WAF requires a higher initial investment, but its comprehensive features offer valuable returns for businesses with larger budgets.

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

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Kiuwan

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,889 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)

Kiuwan

Ranking in Application Security Tools

29th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (25th)

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 Kiuwan is 1.1%, up from 1.0% 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%
Kiuwan	1.1%
Other	98.4%

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

Anshul Anshul

Sr. Manager at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

Efficient and accurate scanning, and detailed analysis

In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further. Another issue I've encountered is that Kiuwan only looks at the version of components and doesn't take into account any workaround fixes that have been implemented at the code level. This can result in false positives being reported. Additionally, these issues are in the "insights" tab and not in the code base security aspect. Lastly, when muting findings that are false positives, there should be an option to see the only available at the code level rather than at the organization level because it can lead to missing vulnerabilities if they are muted at the org level. An additional feature that would be helpful is the ability to easily download reports from Kiuwan. Specifically, in the "insights" tab, we have been encountering an error when trying to download the PDF report. We are able to download the code-based security report, but not the insights report. This has been an ongoing issue for the past couple of months and would be beneficial if it could be resolved. My main recommendation would be to address the issues with downloading reports that we have been experiencing. Additionally, it would be helpful if Kiuwan could support a wider range of programming languages, as there are currently some that are not compatible with the tool. If the code of a particular application falls under the category which is not compatible with Kiuwan, then it will not be able to scan it.

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

"I have thousands of exposed websites and APIs. Being able to control what is happening and try to prevent any attack is the best feature."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF has been especially helpful here, automatically learning and adjusting protection without requiring constant manual tuning."

"By using a cloud application security solution, our company can save costs by reducing the need for additional security hardware and software and improving operational efficiency."

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

"From a security perspective, it is quite good."

"It provides security for our customers and our products."

"The main benefits that I have seen from using Check Point CloudGuard WAF is that the security posture is very good, it analyzes and delivers the threats, enriches the intelligence, and I get proper clarity in my organization."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pros

"The solution has a continuous integration process."

"The solution offers very good technical support."

"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."

"Software analytics for a lot of different languages including ABAP."

"We are using this solution to increase the quality of our software and to test the vulnerabilities in our tools before the customers find them."

"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."

"I find it immensely helpful because it's not just about generating code; it's about ensuring efficiency in the execution."

"I like that I can scan the code without sending it to the Kiuwan cloud. I can do it locally on my device. When the local analyzer finishes, the results display on the dashboard in the cloud. It's essential for security purposes to be able to scan my code locally."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

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

"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."

"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."

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

"It doesn't detect user activity like some of its competitors. It's not a vulnerability, but it's a legitimate activity that it doesn't detect. It only detects vulnerabilities or misconfigurations."

"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."

"You need to know exactly the system. You cannot have someone running the system if they don't have the knowledge to do so."

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

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF cons

"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."

"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."

"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."

"Kiuwan's support has room for improvement. You can only open a ticket is through email, and the support team is outside of our country. They should have a support number or chat."

"In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further."

"It would be beneficial to streamline calls and transitions seamlessly for improved functionality."

"The solution seems to give us a lot of false positives. This could be improved quite a bit."

"Perhaps more languages supported."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

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

"The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."

"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."

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

"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."

"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"

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing and cost advice

"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."

"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."

"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

"Check with your account manager."

"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."

"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."

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

879,889 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

Computer Software Company

13%

University

10%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

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	16
Midsize Enterprise	4
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?

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 Kiuwan

Compared 36% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 10% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 8% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 8% of the time

GitHub vs Kiuwan

Compared 6% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

January 2026

Download Check Point CloudGuard WAF product report

Buyer's Guide

Kiuwan

January 2026

Download Kiuwan 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

Software analytics technology with a breadth of third party integrations that takes into account the wealth of applications your teams are currently using.

We facilitate and encourage work between unlocalized teams. We understand the complexity of working on multi technology environments, constantly striving to increase the number of programming languages and technologies we support.

Kiuwan

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto

DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Kiuwan

December 2025

Free Report: Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Kiuwan

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,889 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Kiuwan 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.