Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs NetScaler comparison

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Read 107 NetScaler reviews

2,586 Views
641 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 1, 2025

Citrix NetScaler and Check Point CloudGuard WAF compete in the field of application delivery and security solutions. Based on feature richness and integration benefits, Check Point CloudGuard WAF seems to have the upper hand due to its robust security features and ease of integration within cloud environments.

Features: Citrix NetScaler is known for its flexible deployment model, load balancing, SSL offload, and integration with Citrix XenApp. It also offers content redirection and user authentication features. Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides intrusion prevention, bot protection, and AI-driven threat detection, enhanced by ease of integration within cloud settings and a powerful management interface.

Room for Improvement: Citrix NetScaler could improve with more feature innovation, easier customization, better documentation, and more flexible licensing. Users find some configuration processes complex. Check Point CloudGuard WAF could enhance its management interface consistency, make integration with other security solutions easier, and improve technical support responsiveness, while also providing more cost-effective customization options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Citrix NetScaler deploys well across various environments but faces issues with initial deployment and mixed customer service feedback. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is praised for cloud deployments and integration, though occasionally hindered by support responsiveness and language barriers.

Pricing and ROI: Citrix NetScaler is viewed as more expensive with complex licensing, yet its features and ROI potential are acknowledged. Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers competitive pricing and is considered more costly than Azure WAF, but users report good ROI due to effective threat prevention features.

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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. NetScaler

Download the complete report

Helped 860,168 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 Web Application Firewall (WAF)

11th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (9th)

NetScaler

Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)

14th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

107

Ranking in other categories

Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (1st), Network Management Applications (5th)

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 1.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of NetScaler is 3.3%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Web Application Firewall (WAF)

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

DEMİRHAN ÇAVUŞOĞLU

Cloud Consultant at Migros Ticaret A.Ş.

A tool for centralized management including inventory and sales tracking

Citrix ADM has the ability to implement policies to tighten security. For instance, you can restrict access to your network from outsiders or lack necessary security measures such as antivirus programs. Additionally, there's the Delivery Controller, which allows for comprehensive monitoring and management tasks such as remote restarts, maintenance, and registration. Another essential component is the Director, which provides detailed insights into sessions, including identifying session failures, connection issues, user lockouts, etc. It presents a list of problems to address, enabling you to click on them and resolve them efficiently.

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

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

"After integrating AppSec with other applications, team members can easily work without fear of confidential information exposure."

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

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

"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security helped reduce the cost of ownership for our web application firewall by 50%."

"The most valuable feature we have found in Check Point CloudGuard WAF is its rich logging capabilities."

"The most effective CloudGuard feature for threat prevention is its web app protection."

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

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pros

"It is the best product out there."

"Citrix Director has been great. It gives us one pane of glass to be able to monitor what's going on with the user sessions as well as to keep on top of the virtual desktops, any servers that may be offline or behaving suspiciously, or any troublesome spots like disconnections. We also use Citrix Studio for maintaining the actual servers that are hosting these applications. We use it for delivery groups in case we need to modify delivery groups in regards to which groups have access to which applications. It has been very helpful."

"Helped us a lot with load balancing."

"Very stable."

"The stability is good. If there is a problem, the load will be shifted to other sites automatically, which has been a good experience for us."

"I prefer this solution because of its user-friendly interface. I find it simple and close to what I am currently using, which is Citrix Fortiva Access for Multi-Factor Authentication. I appreciate the familiar user interface and troubleshooting tools it offers."

"HTTP analysis and action. We have a lot of custom web applications that sometimes require custom header insertions. Some of these custom apps are external and, via the content switching, we can use one IP and leverage various back-end web app servers."

"The analytics are a great feature."

More NetScaler pros

Cons

"The creation of security profiles for each application takes a lot of time."

"CloudGuard for Application Security, like the other Check Point applications, has been presenting major latency problems when entering their administrative portal."

"The UI interface needs improvement because there are a number of bugs. Integration with the SIEM platform is currently one of the key challenges that need to be addressed."

"The user interface, SmartConsole, sometimes malfunctions and requires a restart."

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

"The learning curve was a challenge due to initially incorrect configurations."

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

"We are satisfied with the product because it does what we need it to do, but one thing that I would like to see improved in the product is the protection of our mobile applications. When I migrate the traffic from our mobile application to CloudGuard, we are not getting what we expected."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF cons

"Manageability and adaptability can also be challenging for end customers."

"The product could be improved by making it easier to use and easier to implement."

"The user interface could be more friendly. Some wizards and other documentation for administrators, as well as some use cases, helps us to understand the solution."

"This is an expensive solution."

"The setup was not simple."

"The main areas for improvement would be around documentation and support. If a feature can be used in two or three ways, show that feature being used in all of those ways. Documentation seems to only cover the primary use case and leaves you to either run through trial and error or consult the user community. In terms of support, I have never actually had them solve any of my issues. I have always solved them myself and then provided the resolution to support."

"Citrix ADM needs to improve on its additional features and reduce the communication ports."

"There is room for improvement regarding the pricing policy for Citrix offices."

More NetScaler cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

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

"I find the pricing to be reasonable."

"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."

"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."

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

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing and cost advice

"I do not have any experience with the pricing of the product."

"For partners, NetScaler is not as expensive price-wise versus F5."

"There isn't much of a difference between the cost of Citrix and that of other similar solutions."

"Ninety day free trial makes it easy to try out this solution."

"The license for Citrix NetScaler is on an annual basis and it is reasonably priced."

"We have been evaluating F5, Citrix, and other ADC products. Citrix is the most expense of all of them."

"The licenses for this product are payable as a yearly subscription, and carry a high price-point. The subscription scheme is quite complicated, and costs will increase with each additional feature that is required, outside of the basic setup."

"Its price is comparable to others and affordable."

More NetScaler pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

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

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Manufacturing Company

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 Citrix ADC?

The most valuable feature for us is the application firewalling in Citrix NetScaler, ensuring only valid traffic enters our environment.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Citrix ADC?

After deployment, Citrix Netscaler shifted to a subscription-based license scheme for support, which is slightly more expensive.

What needs improvement with Citrix ADC?

Citrix NetScaler is a robust product, but mastering it requires significant learning and training due to its complexity. While it could be easier to manage, it is like transitioning from driving a ...

Imperva Web Application Firewall vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Comparisons

Compared 19% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 15% of the time

AWS WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 12% of the time

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 12% of the time

open-appsec vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 11% of the time

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF Competitors

HAProxy vs NetScaler

Compared 11% of the time

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs NetScaler

Compared 10% of the time

Fortinet FortiADC vs NetScaler

Compared 9% of the time

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs NetScaler

Compared 8% of the time

NGINX Plus vs NetScaler

Compared 6% of the time

More NetScaler Competitors

Product Reports

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Download Check Point CloudGuard WAF product report

Download NetScaler product report

Also Known As

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

Citrix ADC, Citrix NetScaler VPX, NetScaler Console, NetScaler Web Application Firewall

Overview

Check Point CloudGuard WAF (Web Application Firewall) is a cloud-native security solution designed to protect web applications and APIs from known and unknown threats. It employs contextual AI and machine learning to prevent zero-day attacks without relying on traditional signature-based detection methods, ensuring that applications remain secure even as new threats emerge.

CloudGuard WAF offers preemptive protection against vulnerabilities by using machine learning to identify and block zero-day threats like Log4Shell and Spring4Shell. It provides precise detection capabilities, minimizing the need for constant fine-tuning and reducing false positives. Designed for cloud-native environments, CloudGuard WAF integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines, supporting automated deployment and configuration through infrastructure as code (IaC) or APIs.

Key Features of CloudGuard WAF:

ML-Based Threat Prevention: Stops application-layer attacks, including those listed in the OWASP Top 10, with minimal tuning and no reliance on signature updates.
API Discovery and Security: Identifies and secures APIs, preventing misuse and enforcing API schemas to protect against unauthorized access.
Bot and DDoS Prevention: Detects and mitigates automated attacks that can disrupt services or degrade customer experiences.
Intrusion Prevention (IPS): Provides protection against over 2,800 web-related CVEs using Check Point’s award-winning IPS technology.

Benefits of CloudGuard WAF:

Zero-Day Protection: Mitigates risks from newly discovered vulnerabilities without waiting for signature updates.
Reduced Operational Overhead: Eliminates the need for constant manual tuning and exception handling, simplifying security management.
Comprehensive API Security: Enhances control over your attack surface by discovering and securing all APIs, including shadow, rogue, and deprecated endpoints.
Fast and Easy Deployment: Deployable within minutes via WAF as a Service (WAFaaS), requiring only a one-time DNS configuration for immediate protection.

CloudGuard WAF is particularly suitable for organizations using modern, cloud-based architectures that require robust, automated security measures for both applications and APIs. Its capabilities are valuable for industries that handle sensitive data, such as finance or healthcare, where compliance and data protection are critical. Pricing and support are typically customized to the specific needs and scale of the deployment, with options for continuous updates and maintenance through Check Point's managed services.

CloudGuard WAF by Check Point provides advanced, AI-driven protection for web applications and APIs, offering automated, precise threat prevention and easy integration with cloud-native environments, ensuring robust security without the need for extensive manual configuration.

Check Point Software Technologies

One platform for a consistent application delivery and security experience because nobody has time to learn multiple systems to manage ADC deployments. NetScaler is built with a single code base using a software-based architecture, so no matter which ADC form factor you choose — hardware, virtual machine, bare metal, or container — the behavior will be the same.

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto

ABB Schweiz, Aer Lingus, AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Amnet Technology Solutions, Aramex International, Ascenty, Atos, Autodesk

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. NetScaler