No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs Comodo cWatch comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 13, 2026

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 WAF (formerly C...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (5th), Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (8th), DevSecOps (2nd)
Comodo cWatch
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
37th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
CDN (29th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is 2.0%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Comodo cWatch is 1.4%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)2.0%
Comodo cWatch1.4%
Other96.6%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Krishnakumar Mahadevan - PeerSpot reviewer
CISO at Spink Solutions Private Limited
Cloud security has strengthened risk posture and improved advanced threat visibility
There are some API gateway and API securities I mentioned. If these are incorporated with AI-related features, particularly those seven key vulnerabilities I mentioned—token theft and tool poisoning—that would be beneficial. AI-related features are not included yet in Check Point CloudGuard WAF. However, they are present in FortiGate. That is the advantage of FortiGate now. FortiGate is stopping all AI-related vulnerabilities now. FortiGate has this capability. It is unfortunate that even Palo Alto also lacks one or two of these features. Check Point Quantum is very good, without a doubt. However, their capabilities are not in comparison with Palo Alto. There are some features, but there are some gaps in comparison with Palo Alto.
Bernardo Murillo - PeerSpot reviewer
Director De Netquatro at Netquatro
Alerts organizations if any malware is detected and removes it quickly
The solution allows me to change my logo. It gives me a white-label portal because I am a partner. OWASP has been the most effective in malware prevention. It can detect if the headers are okay and do FTP scans. We get alerts if we have some malware. It is removed very quickly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The best feature of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is its advanced threat prevention, which is integrated with Check Point threat cloud intelligence providing real-time protection against web application attacks, including zero-day threats, automatically sourced from the threat cloud, Check Point threat intelligence database, analyzing millions of indicators of compromise daily."
"We have prevented many potential threats that could be a major setback to our set goals."
"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security helped reduce the cost of ownership for our web application firewall by 50%."
"After integrating AppSec with other applications, team members can easily work without fear of confidential information exposure."
"Among its most outstanding features is the powerful AI in container security; above all, it is one of the most powerful and easy-to-manage solutions."
"It helps me sleep at night, providing peace of mind."
"We can ensure that by following and adapting our needs based on these guidelines we will be a great organization with a strong vision and a great security framework established to protect us."
"I can recommend Check Point CloudGuard Code Security to other organizations as it is a good platform to protect our organization."
"The FIM feature, the information in the new management system, and their support are the most valuable features. The scanned results are quite fast as compared to other platforms compared to scanning timing. It takes about a minute or two minutes. Also, the results of the Comodo scan results are in detail."
"The solution is very good and I feel more secure under this than I did under Symantec or McAfee."
"My customers see ROI in the sense that their whole environment is secure."
"We get alerts if we have some malware."
"They took my website under their surveillance, scanned the website for infection, detected the incident, and removed it in a jiff."
"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
 

Cons

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF can be improved in several ways. We have faced slowness issues in our network after onboarding it on any application."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF could be improved by simplifying the initial setup for a faster deployment, making the dashboard and reporting more customizable, and offering a more accessible pricing model."
"The documentation of each of the tools that they offer needs to be better."
"There are occasions when it interfaces with other systems, leading to a loss of visibility."
"I would like it to be able to analyze more complex functions, although I did not examine the case study of more complex implementations. Things like forum fields, etc seem to need a little more focused protection of the fields scheme validation."
"I feel like I need more clarity in understanding pricing for DDoS protection."
"They should improve in the delivery of more detailed reports with more information."
"The creation of security profiles for each application takes a lot of time."
"Better CDN could be a great thing since this is the best that any website owners would be interested in for protecting their website."
"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"The portal is a little slow."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."
"The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."
"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."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"If the pricing for the Infinity platform covers everything, it would be more straightforward. I had a hard time selling it to our CEO as a former CFO because of the differentials. There are different deltas year to year over a five-year period. It is very difficult to explain. It would be easier to digest for our executives if there was a flatter scale"
"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."
"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."
"Comodo cWatch’s first level, which has fewer features, costs $7."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
9%
Construction Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
13%
Hospitality Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business54
Midsize Enterprise23
Large Enterprise34
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
It is a little bit expensive, but the pricing model is acceptable, though a reduction would make it more competitive with leaders such as Palo Alto.
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
The false positive rate is a concern, but I could recommend improvements where false positives have to be minimized better. This all depends on how the rules are customized and configured, and it c...
What is your primary use case for CloudGuard for Application Security?
The main purpose is to have network security through machine learning, which can offer threat detection and intelligence for my endpoints, and I am looking for application security. I am looking fo...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec, Check Point CloudGuard Code Security
cWatch
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Xerox, Intel, HP, UPS, Western Union, Western Digital
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Comodo cWatch and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.