

Acunetix and Check Point WAF are both significant players in the web application security space. Based on user feedback, Acunetix holds an edge due to its quick scan features and integration capabilities, while Check Point WAF stands out with its AI-driven threat detection and management.
Features: Acunetix is recognized for its high speed in scanning multiple domains, easy setup, and detailed reporting that helps in effective vulnerability management. It integrates well with CI/CD tools, supports low false positives, and offers flexible deployment options in both cloud and on-premises environments. Check Point WAF, on the other hand, is noted for its AI-driven threat detection, robust API security, and centralized management that suits complex cloud infrastructure needs.
Room for Improvement: Acunetix users often point out the high cost, occasional false positives, and the need for more detailed reporting and advanced integration with new tools. There's also a call for better scanning capabilities for web services and improvements in multidomain pricing. Check Point WAF users cite high pricing and a complex user interface, suggesting enhancements in initial setup simplicity and improved AI capabilities to match competitors.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Acunetix is praised for its straightforward deployment, both on-premises and in the cloud, and 24/7 customer service, though some report delays in responses. Check Point WAF excels in cloud environment adaptation with strong centralized management, though deployment complexity and required specific training are noted as areas needing improvement.
Pricing and ROI: Acunetix is seen as expensive with pricing based on the number of domains, but many users justify the cost due to the security improvements and ROI. Similarly, Check Point WAF is perceived as costly but offers competitive pricing packages, providing value with its comprehensive feature set in cloud security, seen as worthwhile considering its enterprise-grade protection level.
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.
It saves a significant amount of time by covering attack surfaces.
I have seen a return on investment, as Acunetix helps reduce the man-days and effort needed for scanning bulk applications through automated assessments.
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.
For high-severity issues, they reach out within two to three hours, and for critical issues, a response is received within 15 minutes.
The technical support from Invicti is very good and fast.
Support staff not being familiar with the problem.
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.
Check Point CloudGuard WAF's scalability is very good.
Acunetix can handle increasing workloads and more applications easily.
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.
The provider could improve by providing better guidance and support during the configuration process.
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.
A machine learning-based adaptive mode could help the WAF learn over time and auto-tune policies.
The main concern is related to false positives; Acunetix needs to work on identifying valid and invalid findings.
I could supply it with maybe a Swagger file or a JSON file, and Acunetix would pick it up, scan all the endpoints according to the OWASP Top Ten, and give me remediation and actionable remediation reports.
Acunetix should have better integration with newer tools such as GitHub and Azure DevOps.
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.
The pricing cost is affordable for small and mid-sized organizations, and when compared to Checkmarx, it is significantly affordable, as Checkmarx is quite expensive.
We secured a special licensing model for penetration testing companies, which is cost-effective.
The pricing of Acunetix is pretty expensive and could be improved.
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.
Its most valuable role is in enhancing security by identifying potential vulnerabilities efficiently.
The solution is excellent at detecting SQL injection and cross-site scripting vulnerabilities.
The best feature Acunetix offers is the centralized dashboard and the quality of reports it generates, which includes various options for selecting reports and developer options for directly sharing the reports with developers.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) | 1.1% |
| Acunetix | 2.4% |
| Other | 96.5% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 57 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 24 |
| Large Enterprise | 40 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 18 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 7 |
| Large Enterprise | 19 |
Check Point WAF offers a robust security framework with AI-driven threat detection and seamless integration, protecting applications and APIs in multi-cloud environments.
Effective in preemptively blocking threats through AI and machine learning, Check Point WAF reduces false positives and operational workload. Its integration capabilities and threat intelligence provide comprehensive protection against zero-day attacks, while centralized management facilitates cost-effective and insightful threat reporting.
What are the main features of Check Point WAF?Check Point WAF is employed in industries securing web applications and APIs, especially in multi-cloud environments. It effectively protects backend services, prevents unauthorized access, and monitors traffic, making it suitable for businesses with diverse infrastructures. It ensures compliance with security standards and adapts to fluctuating traffic patterns.
Acunetix is a robust web application security testing tool offering rapid scanning, user-friendly interfaces, and accurate vulnerability detection with minimal false positives. It supports both cloud and on-premises deployment, making it versatile for various security needs.
Acunetix is distinguished by its capability to identify critical vulnerabilities such as cross-site scripting and SQL injection with high precision. It integrates seamlessly with CI/CD tools, supporting continuous scanning and large-scale application management. The centralized dashboard and detailed automated reporting streamline operations. Despite its benefits, users suggest improvements like reducing false positives, flexible pricing, and enhanced API scanning. Better integration with platforms like GitHub and Azure DevOps is sought, alongside more comprehensive customization and faster scanning. Mobile application scanning and improved team collaboration tools are also desired.
What features make Acunetix stand out?Acunetix is widely implemented across industries undertaking web application security assessments, including those requiring penetration testing and vulnerability assessment. It ensures applications meet security protocols and complies with standards while fitting into CI/CD workflows for secure pre-release checks.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.