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

Check Point IPS vs Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 19, 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 IPS
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Palo Alto Networks Advanced...
Ranking in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) category, the mindshare of Check Point IPS is 5.7%, down from 9.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is 7.4%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS)
 

Featured Reviews

Greg Tate - PeerSpot reviewer
Great for detection and access with the capabilities of defining specific rules
Support is the biggest area for improvement. Check Point is responsive, however, their support agents seem to be very siloed in their ability and/or product knowledge. It takes time and escalation to get through most tickets as they are passed from one group to another and then back again. We are able to navigate our support issues with the aid of our account team, so I want to underscore that support is indeed responsive. However, the processes support techs have to follow seem to be the root cause of the support response issues.
Carlos Bracamonte - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust, reliable, simple to install and good technical support
We are attempting to improve the use of URL filtering beyond threat protection. I'm not sure what the remaining threat protection features are off the top of my head. But beyond that, we use URL filtering. We have three approved cases for using external dynamic lists that are stored in a bucket repository. Then, for each URL site that needs to be whitelisted, we add it to the external dynamic list in order to gain access to this email. I would like Wildfire to be implemented. We use the equivalent in Cisco is the integration policies. We have the Wildfire but we are not currently implementing it. We don't have the license to use it, but we are not currently implementing it until we present the use cases that the company gives some value to and they approve the use of it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This is a very stable product."
"Behavior analytics and monitoring capabilities of Check Point IPS are valuable, especially for cybersecurity purposes."
"Some of the features for views and visualization are already predefined as default files."
"Check Point offers DDoS and endpoint protection called EDR or XDR, so it provides a holistic security architecture for any organization."
"The autonomous threat prevention is very easy to use. The APIs and SmartConsole tool also work well."
"There's an automatic update after every 2 hours which makes sure that the database is up to date and providing zero-day vulnerability protection."
"Its event analysis and centralization features are very important for any organization."
"Check Point IPS is very easy to configure. It's part of Check Point's blade architecture, where firewall, VPN, and IPS configurations are identical, making the learning curve minimal. The feature can be enabled with a straightforward process, allowing default or customized configurations."
"The user interface is a bit more professional than some free products."
"Everything has been okay with the solution. We are using all of the features."
"The sandboxing tools offer great prevention for cloud feeds."
"The most valuable features are the simplicity, transparency, and overall ease of management."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Threat Prevention for our company is the next generation firewall."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It's quite easy. Deployment took one to two weeks."
"One of the most valuable features is the anti-malware protection."
"We are currently using the URL filtering feature, which is the most popular."
 

Cons

"When exceptions need to be done for certain profiles, it is easy to get them done, however, implementation on some general ones may cause some extra work as the IPS is not easy to overwrite."
"The solution needs enhanced reporting. The reporting on Cisco Stealthwatch and Darktrace is much bigger. The visibility that they grant for the filtering capabilities over large infrastructures are far superior."
"We have a lot of false positives and the list of IPs are not up to date in terms of their location."
"Threat Prevention policies are not very easily manageable as there are several profiles/policies/etc. Therefore, there are several ways to add exceptions and check the configuration."
"It would be good to update the public documentation of Check Point so that we can generate improvements and best practices based on the documentation."
"The price has room for improvement."
"It is generally good, but improving the performance would be the one thing I'd take a look at right now."
"Support is the biggest area for improvement."
"The organization mail security solutions could be improved. There is no mail security solution available."
"In Africa, the technical support is probably not as good as in Europe and the USA because it's a specific premium support, partner-enabled premium support and all of that. But it's really good, I don't really have any complaints, it's fairly good. I'll give them 80%."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the only thing I don't like is the support."
"Sometimes when you want to group a set of ports, and communicate with Palo Alto, you cannot group TCP and UDP ports together. This needs to be adjusted."
"There is a potential drawback with the lack of support for the ICAP protocol."
"The price of licenses should be lowered to make it less costly to scale our solution."
"The documentation needs to be improved. I need better information about how to configure it and what the best practices are."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention could improve the commercial offing. Other solutions, such as Fortinet provide better commercial features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of this product should be reduced."
"The pricing for Check Point IPS is competitive and brings good value for the money."
"It is a reasonably priced product."
"I give the price of the solution a five out of ten."
"The pricing model can be more competitive."
"I think that the price of support is around $40,000 USD or $50,000 USD per year."
"My company pays for the yearly licensing of Check Point IPS. It is a very expensive tool."
"Enabling IPS does not require any additional license purchase from OEM, as it comes by default with the NGFW bundle."
"The pricing has improved with the newer generation of their Firewalls, but the price could always be lower."
"The product’s pricing is expensive for small companies."
"There is an initial, expensive investment but the return is good."
"If you want to have all of the good features then you have to pay extra for licensing."
"It is an expensive solution and I would like to see a drop in price."
"From one to ten, with one being the most expensive, I would rate the pricing of Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention a one out of ten. It is my understanding that Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention is the most expensive one."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"It's not too expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
22%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Check Point IPS?
The most valuable feature of the solution is called tunneling. Tunneling is one of the major security features that hackers cannot penetrate through.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Check Point IPS?
Comparisons with Fortinet show that Check Point IPS is relatively more expensive, but we found it cheaper to retain it rather than switch.
What needs improvement with Check Point IPS?
Currently, the solution is good for my needs, so I don't have any particular improvements to recommend. However, a reduction in price would always be welcome.
Which is the best DDoS protection solution for a big ISP for monitoring and mitigating?
Arbor would be the best bid, apart from Arbor, Palo Alto and Fortinet have good solutions. As this is an ISP, I would prefer Arbor.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention?
The pricing is competitive, and with current campaigns and discounts, it provides an excellent device for a reasonable price.
 

Also Known As

Check Point Intrusion Prevention System
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Morton Salt, Medical Advocacy and Outreach, BH Telecom, Lightbeam Health Solutions, X by Orange, Cadence, Nihondentsu, Datastream Connexion, Good Sam, Omnyway, FIASA, Pacific Life, Banco del Pacifico, Control Southern, Xero, Centrify
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, SkiStar AB, TRI-AD, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point IPS vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.