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

Check Point Security Management vs Palo Alto Networks WildFire comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 1, 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
6.4
Check Point Security Management boosts efficiency and security by significantly reducing incidents, enhancing returns, and streamlining operations.
Sentiment score
6.5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire provides cost-effective, centralized threat management, reducing security costs and improving efficiency in high-threat environments.
I have seen a strong ROI from using Check Point Security Management through unified policy management, reduced misconfigurations, and faster incident response.
The time to resolve issues is very much better now with Check Point Security Management.
I have seen a hundred percent return on investment with Check Point Security Management.
The service generates a low rate of false positives, reducing the overhead of managing false positive events.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.2
Check Point Security Management support is responsive with expertise, but experiences vary by region and engineer experience, needing speed improvements.
Sentiment score
7.0
Palo Alto Networks WildFire's support is responsive and expert but varies in availability and response time, especially for smaller companies.
We have partner support that helps us mitigate vulnerabilities reported by our infrastructure team.
The challenge was with drivers due to the size, and we had not provisioned the partition to the right size.
The customer support for Check Point Security Management is great.
There is a lack of SLA adherence, and third-party partners do not provide prompt responses.
The service response times are aligned with standards, responding within a few hours based on the problem's criticality.
The support is quite difficult to access promptly.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
Check Point Security Management is praised for scalable efficiency, centralized console management, and adaptability across extensive networks.
Sentiment score
8.2
Palo Alto Networks WildFire efficiently scales for diverse environments, supporting thousands of users while integrating well with security modules.
It can be a multi-domain Security Management server and can manage large or segmented environments with multiple domains or customers.
When you upgrade multiple times, you leave many files that are useless. They are dated, so it's always better to create a new machine every few versions, for example, three or four major versions.
Regarding scalability, I have given the rating of nine out of ten.
Wildfire is highly scalable.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is scalable, and I give it a nine for scalability.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
Check Point Security Management is stable, though occasional application crashes and connectivity issues occur, particularly under heavy loads.
Sentiment score
8.5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is highly rated for reliability, seamless integration, and effective network security performance without disruptions.
Check Point Security Management is really stable, and I have not experienced any downtime or issues with reliability except for when we do upgrades.
The SmartConsole used to administrate the security management is somewhat unstable.
It performs filtering, malware blocking, and scanning.
The solution is scalable and stable.
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point Security Management requires usability, performance, compliance improvements, enhanced interoperability, and better customer support for effective use.
WildFire needs improvements in integration, user-friendliness, and pricing, along with better support, automation, and global availability.
When the logs are too heavy for the security management server, the CPU spike will be high, causing our management day-to-day activity to lag or become difficult.
I believe they can improve the management by allowing better API functionality because the API now is a little complicated, making it difficult to do automation.
Additionally, it crashes pretty regularly, so they could resolve the stability issues as well.
The dashboard should provide better visibility, especially in showing how many files are sent to Wildfire and their findings.
It is a very good product.
The support could be improved, as it takes a while to get assistance from the vendors.
 

Setup Cost

Despite high costs, Check Point offers advanced features and strong security, making it valuable for enterprises with complex needs.
Palo Alto WildFire offers advanced threat protection, appealing to enterprises despite its high cost, potentially deterring smaller organizations.
Since we are using it extensively, we get significant discounts during procurement.
Licensing is quite expensive.
We pay on a three-year base.
I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of affordability.
 

Valuable Features

Check Point Security Management offers centralized control, efficient policy and log management, enhanced security, and seamless integration with systems.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire automates threat analysis, excels in sandboxing, and offers robust security with cloud-based, user-friendly features.
Check Point Security Management has positively impacted my organization by providing centralized control, allowing us to manage all security policies and gateways from a single console, reducing complexity and saving time.
We can't work without Check Point because it provides the real visibility needed to manage the environment.
The best feature Check Point Security Management offers is the ability to upgrade firewalls directly from the management console of the security management.
Integrating Palo Alto Networks WildFire with various security protocols similar to a firewall has significantly improved the overall threat detection capabilities in our organization.
The most valuable feature of Wildfire is its sandboxing capability for examining suspicious files or locations.
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point Security Manage...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
11th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (8th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (6th)
Palo Alto Networks WildFire
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Check Point Security Management is 0.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks WildFire is 10.7%, down from 12.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Palo Alto Networks WildFire10.7%
Check Point Security Management0.7%
Other88.6%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2751156 - PeerSpot reviewer
Years of using the solution significantly improve log management and troubleshooting efficiency
Check Point Security Management has positively impacted my organization because, after migrating from our previous firewall, a Cisco ASA, we were able to see what traffic was passing through the firewall and from that, build out least access privilege firewall rules. So only what's actually needed by the organization is being let through. The rest is being dropped. The measurable outcomes with Check Point Security Management show that the troubleshooting is definitely quicker. Now it just takes a few minutes to find out where the error is and resolve it. Before, it was at least an hour or two of troubleshooting to locate the issue.
AjayKumar17 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced cybersecurity with advanced sandboxing and effective in controlling DNS issues
Improvements are needed in the UI part. The dashboard should provide better visibility, especially in showing how many files are sent to Wildfire and their findings. This information should be integrated with the Dashboard so that system admins can see what is happening. Furthermore, technical support needs a lot of improvement, particularly in terms of responsiveness and adhering to service level agreements.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
869,089 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user206346 - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 11, 2015
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto Networks
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto: Management Goodies You often have comparisons of both firewalls concerning security components. Of course, a firewall must block attacks, scan for viruses, build VPNs, etc. However, in this post I am discussing the advantages and disadvantages from both vendors concerning…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business37
Midsize Enterprise28
Large Enterprise41
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business36
Midsize Enterprise17
Large Enterprise28
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Check Point Security Management?
The most beneficial features for us are the alert classifications, which help us prioritize critical issues, and the detailed reports that provide insights into attack origins and purposes, such as...
What needs improvement with Check Point Security Management?
The needed improvements in Check Point Security Management depend very much on the customer's infrastructure. For example, an appliance has an easier time than someone with VMs. With VMs, there can...
What is your primary use case for Check Point Security Management?
My main use case for Check Point Security Management is to troubleshoot or add policy, depending on the situation. It could be both, but mainly troubleshooting. We go and take care of the customer'...
How does Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall compare with Palo Alto Networks Wildfire?
The Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall is a very powerful and very complex piece of anti-viral software. When one considers that fact, it is all the more impressive that the setup is a fairly straightf...
Which is better - Wildfire or FortiGate?
FortiGate has a lot going for it and I consider it to be the best, most user-friendly firewall out there. What I like the most about it is that it has an attractive web dashboard with very easy nav...
How does Cisco ASA Firewall compare with Palo Alto's WildFire?
When looking to change our ASA Firewall, we looked into Palo Alto’s WildFire. It works especially in preventing advanced malware and zero-day exploits with real-time intelligence. The sandbox featu...
 

Also Known As

R80.10, R80, R77.30, R77, Check Point R80.10 Security Management, R80 Security Management
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hedgetec, Geiger
Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Security Management vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,089 professionals have used our research since 2012.