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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.7
Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers 70-90% ROI by enhancing security, reducing costs, and improving NIST compliance and efficiency.
Sentiment score
1.0
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional offers over 200% ROI, enhancing client engagement and securing application security testing contracts effectively.
When we are attacked, we can understand how important the solution is.
Cyber security manager at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
When you migrate to the cloud, it feels like saving 90% of your time.
Manager, Managed Security Services at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Most of the operations happen in the background, so I do not spend much time on it.
Principal Cybersecurity Specialist at Unitel S.A.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.3
Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers strong support with skilled staff, though response times and performance could improve.
Sentiment score
5.0
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional offers responsive customer support with effective documentation and community resources, ensuring quick issue resolution.
They need to increase the number of people for 24/7 support.
Principal Cybersecurity Specialist at Unitel S.A.
They were responsive even before we committed to buying their solution.
Infrastructure Manager at FPMH
I also received full technical support, especially during the implementation.
Cyber security manager at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
The technical support from PortSwigger is excellent.
Cyber security manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
The technical support for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is pretty good, and I would give it a nine.
Senior Business Development Manager at Intouch World
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is praised for seamless scalability, adaptability, and multi-cloud compatibility, with flexible traffic-based licensing.
Sentiment score
6.2
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional excels in CI/CD integration but faces challenges in automation, mobile testing, and report generation.
If I need to scale, I open a Whatsapp group with the director and the team, and we quickly proceed to do so.
Cyber security manager at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
They have sufficient resources, and there are no challenges from a scalability perspective.
Project Manager at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Check Point CloudGuard WAF's scalability is very good.
Sr. VP of Creative & Development at a non-tech company with 51-200 employees
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers impressive stability, with users praising its reliability, minimal downtime, and quick resolution of update issues.
Sentiment score
8.6
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is reliable with high satisfaction, though some users report memory issues in large-scale tasks.
It is very stable.
Team Leader, Cloudops & Cloud Architect at a consultancy with 501-1,000 employees
It is very stable, never crashing or giving me an error that I can see.
Sysadmin at a government with 501-1,000 employees
I did not have any issues in the last three years during which I had more than ten critical services running on CloudGuard.
Information Technology - Infrastructure and Security at Cyprus Development Bank
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is very stable.
Information Security Engineer at Tübitak Bilgem
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is a very stable tool, and I would rate its stability as eight out of ten.
Senior Business Development Manager at Intouch World
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point CloudGuard WAF users seek cost-effectiveness, better support, enhanced performance, real-time monitoring, streamlined integration, and improved flexibility.
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional requires improvements in usability, performance, pricing, integration, and support to enhance user experience.
The provider could improve by providing better guidance and support during the configuration process.
Infrastructure Manager at FPMH
Future releases should include better bot mitigation, behavioral anomaly detection, compliance templates, advanced threat intel integration, and streamlined multi-cloud support to boost protection and usability.
Senior Cyber Security Engineer at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
A machine learning-based adaptive mode could help the WAF learn over time and auto-tune policies.
Technical Support Executive at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Some AI features might be added.
Information Security Engineer at Tübitak Bilgem
The dashboard of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional could be made more user-friendly.
Senior Business Development Manager at Intouch World
 

Setup Cost

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers extensive features and support, though pricing can be high and complex but justifiable.
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional offers competitive pricing and value for automated testing, with various license options.
It is more expensive than f5, where we purchased everything as bundles, and Check Point costs more, but it is worth the money.
Cyber security manager at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
It is less costly than Cloudflare, Fortinet, and other vendors.
Project Manager at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
I know that its price is relatively expensive compared to other products but it gives benefits that are worth it.
Ciso at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
The pricing for PortSwigger is very cheap, and there are benefits in terms of time and cost savings.
Information Security Engineer at Tübitak Bilgem
I find the price of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional to be very cost-efficient.
Senior Business Development Manager at Intouch World
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers AI-driven security, easy integration, scalability, and robust protection against cyber threats and compliance support.
PortSwigger Burp Suite is praised for its extensibility, user-friendly tools, and effective vulnerability detection at a competitive price.
Upon implementation and evaluation with third-party penetration testing, it meets rigorous security standards required for dealing with financial institutions.
Infrastructure Manager at FPMH
It can protect against zero-day attacks and hidden anomalies.
Amministratore Della Sicurezza Di Rete at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
The solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies effectively.
Information Technology - Infrastructure and Security at Cyprus Development Bank
The most valuable feature of Burp Suite Professional is its ability to schedule tasks for scanning websites.
Cyber security manager at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
I especially value the features for penetration testing.
Information Security Engineer at Tübitak Bilgem
The most valuable features of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional are its ease of use and its cost efficiency.
Senior Business Development Manager at Intouch World
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Application Security Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (9th)
PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
64
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (5th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)
 

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 PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 2.4%, up from 1.9% 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 WAF0.5%
PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional2.4%
Other97.1%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2751468 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Arther Magaya - PeerSpot reviewer
Head Of Information Security at Aura
AI-driven analyses improve efficiency and reliability
I find all the features of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional most useful, particularly the AI enhancement for results and follow-up for retests. This feature helps me follow up on my results and perform retests step-by-step. The automation in AI verifies the findings, ensuring they are correct, and performs step-by-step testing. The Intruder tool enhances testing efficiency through intercepting information and analyzing it. It helps to analyze web applications and intercept the traffic.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
879,853 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Security Firm
6%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise16
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise35
 

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 setup cost was taken with the head of the department, who handled the pricing and everything.
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...
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?
The cost of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is reasonable at approximately $500 per year per user.
 

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: December 2025.
879,853 professionals have used our research since 2012.