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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Veracode 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
7.6
Organizations saw up to 90% ROI from improved security, reduced costs, and operational efficiencies with Check Point CloudGuard WAF.
Sentiment score
6.9
Veracode improved code quality, security, and efficiency, leading to cost savings, faster releases, and enhanced operational benefits for organizations.
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.
The scanners of Veracode bring status of the weaknesses in the current infrastructure. It scans and provides reports regarding the servers, the network, and the applications running on those servers.
Regarding price, the evaluation should focus on how efficiently they will recover their investment, considering the time saved through the use of Veracode Fix, for example, and the ability to fix code at dev time compared to the problems faced when fixing after the product is already deployed.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Check Point CloudGuard WAF's support is praised for expertise, though some suggest improving response times and extending support hours.
Sentiment score
7.4
Veracode provides effective, prompt support with knowledgeable staff, though response times and coordination occasionally need improvement.
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.
Access to the engineering team is crucial for faster feedback on the product fix process.
They are very responsive and quick to help with queries within our scope.
They respond very quickly since security is something critical.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.5
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is praised for scalability, efficiently supporting diverse workloads and seamless expansion across cloud environments.
Sentiment score
7.5
Veracode is scalable and effective for large user volumes, though some note potential scaling costs and manageable packaging challenges.
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.
Cloud solutions are easier to scale than on-premise solutions.
It has a good capacity to scale effectively.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is highly stable and reliable, with minimal interruptions and excellent performance across environments.
Sentiment score
8.0
Users find Veracode stable and reliable, with occasional well-communicated maintenance and improved stability, despite some glitches and false positives.
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.
If the Veracode server is down, we experience many issues during the scan.
It's not that easy to onboard, but once they have been onboarded on the platform, and the pipeline configured alongside the product configured, it works effectively.
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point CloudGuard WAF requires cost reduction, better integration, improved UI, enhanced support, and clearer pricing models.
Veracode faces criticism for false positives, outdated UI, slow scans, high costs, and poor support for new technologies.
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.
If it could be integrated directly with code repositories such as Bitbucket or GitHub, without the need to create a pipeline to upload and decode code, it would simplify the code scan process significantly.
We had issues with scanning large applications. Scanning took a lot of time, so we kept it outside the DevOps pipeline to avoid delaying deployments.
A nice addition would be if it could be extended for scenarios with custom cleansers.
 

Setup Cost

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers competitive pricing with flexible licensing, though costs can be higher and complex when scaling.
Veracode's high pricing suits large enterprises but is challenging for smaller businesses, with negotiable terms for optimal value.
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.
It's not the most expensive solution.
If there's a security gap, you'll never know the cost or effect.
Pricing-wise, I find it a bit expensive because it's based on the number of users requesting access to Veracode.
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers seamless integration, scalability, AI-powered security, and visibility, excelling in protection and cost-efficiency.
Veracode integrates with CI/CD pipelines, offering fast scans, low false positives, and tools for efficient vulnerability management and compliance.
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.
It offers confidence by preventing exposure to vulnerabilities and helps ensure that we are not deploying vulnerable code into production.
The best features in Veracode include static analysis and the early detection of vulnerable libraries; it integrates with tools such as Jenkins.
It fixes issues directly in the IDE while you're doing it.
 

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)
Veracode
Ranking in Application Security Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
201
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Container Security (8th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (2nd)
 

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 Veracode is 9.2%, down from 10.8% 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.
David-Robertson - PeerSpot reviewer
Static scanning and software composition analysis are very helpful, but the usability needs improvement
Static scanning and software composition analysis are very helpful. My colleagues and I don't need to be experts on all of those ancillary things, so we can focus more on the business deliverables. They have a pretty good tool that allows me to run scans of my local integrated development environment. I can find a lot of those flaws a lot sooner than I would if I had to wait for these cloud-based scans. They've come out with some sort of automated fix feature. I haven't used it, but they gave us a demo of it, and that one looks promising. I don't know if it's ready for prime time yet.
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
17%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance 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...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...
What do you like most about Veracode?
The SAST and DAST modules are great.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode?
The product’s price is a bit higher compared to other solutions. However, the tool provides good vulnerability and database features. It is worth the money.
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.