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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional 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
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (11th)
PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
63
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (5th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 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 PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 2.2%, up from 1.9% 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.
Anuradha.Kapoor Kapoor - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers efficient scanning of entire websites but presence of false positive bugs, leading to time-consuming efforts in distinguishing real bugs from false alarms
We have found that so many times, false positive bugs are there, and then we spend a lot of time basically separating them from real bugs. So that's the reason we are looking for some other tool. So we were in discussion with Acunetix. Therefore, the false positive rate is, like, something that we would like to improve. What we are looking for is if this false positive rate goes down because we were OWASP Zap tool users, which was free anyway. But there were a lot of false positives there, and we used to spend a lot of time, like, for security reasons, reproducing those bugs for the development team to fix it. So then we thought, okay, why not we go with the tool? Even if it is not very expensive. But still, every year, we have to renew the license. And we got this tool. Again, we found that in this tool also, even if it is less, there are still a lot of false positive bugs out there. So we again have to spend so much time. So we hired a security tester, who was basically using Acunetix in his previous company for almost three years, and then you said that in that scanning is very slow. The scanning is also slow. Like, sometimes the site scan takes eight hours, six to eight hours. Yeah. And whereas in Acunetix, it took three to four hours. And plus, there are no false positives. I'm not saying none but there's very little. But here, the rate sometimes is very high. These are the two features I think we would like to improve further.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It provides advanced analytics that gives each team time to prepare for any threat that might occur in the future."
"It seamlessly protects through machine learning, giving us visibility into potential attacks and where they come from."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF works well for preemptively blocking Zero Day attacks and detecting hidden anomalies."
"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 solution offers sophisticated security techniques with unique characteristics that can be particularly valuable for the financial sector, which is where we develop apps."
"Support is the same with on-premise devices, and it is very good. Since it is cloud-based, I do not need them as much."
"It helps me sleep at night, providing peace of mind."
"CloudGuard WAF has been great."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional has an intercept tab that helps us to scan our APIs, set the response, and request errors."
"The active scanner, which does an automated search of any web vulnerabilities."
"The technical support from PortSwigger is excellent, managing response time and quality efficiently without any issues."
"It offers very good accuracy. You can trust the results."
"The suite testing models are very good. It's very secure."
"The most valuable feature is the application security. It also has a reasonable price."
"The most valuable features of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional are its ease of use and its cost efficiency."
"The most valuable feature of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is the Burp Intruder tool."
 

Cons

"CloudGuard could improve in areas such as ease of integration with Fortinet and reducing costs associated with deployment in cloud environments like Azure."
"They need improved latency in the main window."
"There are occasions when it interfaces with other systems, leading to a loss of visibility."
"The web user interface needs some improvement, even though the functionality is good."
"Pricing and licensing are really expensive for this product. While it provides a very good security level, the price for each service is high."
"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."
"I would like to be able to integrate the theme of Artificial Intelligence to help review issues and to monitor and view the security issue while also suggesting and interpreting and additionally configuring solutions - basically, acting as an interpreter."
"Cost reduction and trial period extension should be considered with some lucrative discount offerings in buying standard versions."
"The solution lacks sufficient stability."
"The pricing of the solution is quite high."
"If we're running a huge number of scans regularly, it slows down the tool."
"If your application uses multi-factor authentication, registration management cannot be automated."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional could improve the static code review."
"I am from Brazil. The currency exchange rate from a dollar to a Brazilian Real is quite steep. It is almost six to one. It would be good if it can be sold in the local currency, and its price is cheaper for us."
"There is not much automation in the tool."
"We'd like to have more integration potential across all versions of the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."
"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."
"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."
"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."
"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."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."
"There are multiple versions available of PortSwigger Burp Suite, such as enterprise, commercial, professional, and beginners."
"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution, which is neither cheap nor expensive."
"PortSwigger is reasonably-priced. It's fair."
"Our licensing cost is approximately $400 USD per year."
"They should reduce the license cost a little bit. It is $400 per user, and it would be better if they could reduce the licensing fee."
"The pricing of the solution is reasonable. We only need to pay for the annual subscription. I rate the pricing five out of ten."
"The pricing of the solution is cost-effective and is best suited for small and medium-sized businesses."
"PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is an expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

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...
Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?
OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...
What do you like most about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?
I find the price of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional to be very cost-efficient.
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.