Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs Kiuwan comparison

Check Point WAF (formerly C...

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

2,646 Views
2,143 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 16, 2026

Kiuwan and Check Point WAF compete in the space of application security and threat prevention. While both offer compelling features, Check Point's advanced AI-driven threat prevention features provide a slight advantage in security measures.

Features: Kiuwan provides detailed analysis tools with quick scanning, actionable insights for code quality, and seamless integration with various development frameworks and CI processes. Check Point WAF stands out with AI-driven threat prevention, zero-day protection, and DDoS prevention, offering comprehensive protection beyond traditional signature-based methods.

Room for Improvement: Kiuwan could expand support for more programming languages and improve report generation, alongside reducing false positives. Check Point WAF users identify pricing, performance issues, and technical support responsiveness as key areas for improvement, indicating a need for more cost-effective solutions and streamlined customer support.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kiuwan is praised for its ease of deployment in cloud environments and overall good customer service, although improvement in support is suggested. Check Point WAF offers versatile deployment in both cloud and hybrid environments, with strong technical support, though improvements in simplifying deployment and documentation are noted.

Pricing and ROI: Kiuwan is competitively priced, charged typically by lines of code, suitable for various company sizes, while Check Point WAF is more expensive, targeted at mid-to-large enterprises, but justified by its high-end features. Both are seen as worthwhile investments, with Check Point notable for advanced threat mitigation regardless of its premium cost.

To learn more, read our detailed Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Kiuwan Report (Updated: April 2026).

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Kiuwan

Download the complete report

Helped 886,719 peers since 2012

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 Application Security Tools

5th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Web Application Firewall (WAF) (8th)

Kiuwan

Ranking in Application Security Tools

30th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (26th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is 0.6%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.2%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Check Point CloudGuard WAF	0.6%
Kiuwan	1.2%
Other	98.2%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

KrishnakumarM

CISO at Pink Solutions

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.

Read full review

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala

CyberRisk Solution Advisor at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees

Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement

Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran the tool and tried to scan the repository to find the security issues. The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF has been especially helpful here, automatically learning and adjusting protection without requiring constant manual tuning."

"From a security perspective, it is quite good."

"The solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies effectively."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF has positively impacted our organization in security and operational efficiency, with a 30-40% drop in malicious traffic and a 15-20% reduction in manual intervention for our SOC team due to reduced false positives and automated protection."

"With this tool, we have been able to release the overload that was being caused in the IT department and be able to focus on other security functions and thus be able to apply all good practices and be able to manage security 100% of the time."

"The integration with other Microsoft products, especially Visual Studio, is seamless."

"With the introduction of AI in general, Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides very high accuracy on the data, allowing me to avoid a lot of false positives and saving me time in determining if what I'm seeing is a possible attack."

"The automated policy creation and threat intelligence have helped my team by reducing manual configuration and saving time, and the threat intelligence updates ensure immediate protection against new threats, simplifying daily operations and improving response speed."

More Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) pros

"The technical support is very good, and we have received valid answers to our questions."

"I personally like the way it breaks down security vulnerabilities with LoC at first glance."

"Lifecycle features, because they permit us to show non-technical people the risk and costs hidden into the code due to bad programming practices."

"In our digital marketing efforts, our app is in continuous integration and having introduced this tool ensures we are always delivering safe code."

"Kiuwan has enabled us to give our customers peace of mind through early identification of code vulnerabilities and remediation before delivery to the customer."

"It provides value by offering options to enhance both code quality and the security of the company."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is the continuous integration process, which enables us to make the best in terms of security of our solution and not introduce new mistakes, with problems solved step by step."

"Saving time and money by automatically identifying problems is unbelievable."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"While Check Point CloudGuard WAF is a strong solution, it could be improved in a few areas such as simplifying and customizing the user interface and reporting database."

"The reporting can be improved."

"I have encountered issues with Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's technical support. It also has missing configuration features."

"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."

"CloudGuard could improve in areas such as ease of integration with Fortinet and reducing costs associated with deployment in cloud environments like Azure."

"CloudGuard for Application Security, like the other Check Point applications, has been presenting major latency problems when entering their administrative portal."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF can be improved in several ways. We have faced slowness issues in our network after onboarding it on any application."

"Pricing is high, although possibly justified by the service received."

More Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) cons

"We faced a lot of problems with the initial setup and support gave us difficulties around the installation."

"I would like to see additional languages supported."

"Improvement could be made with the integration of the programming tools."

"DIfferent languages, such Spanish, Portuguese, and so on."

"Perhaps more languages supported."

"It would be beneficial to streamline calls and transitions seamlessly for improved functionality."

"I would like to see better integration with Azure DevOps in the next release of this solution."

"In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I find the pricing to be reasonable."

"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."

"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."

"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."

"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."

"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"

"I work for an Indian banking client. In India, companies are on a budget. The company liked Check Point very much, but it was a little bit costly compared to FortiWeb. However, it had more features compared to FortiWeb."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."

More Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) pricing and cost advice

"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."

"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."

"Check with your account manager."

"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."

"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

886,719 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

26%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Comms Service Provider

University

10%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	35
Midsize Enterprise	20
Large Enterprise	19

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	6

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?

Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive. It is a little bit expensive. You cannot avoid this from an Israeli product. Israeli products follow a certain pricing model. If they could reduce the cost ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?

While Check Point CloudGuard WAF is a strong solution, it could be improved in a few areas such as simplifying and customizing the user interface and reporting database. Improving API security dept...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for CloudGuard for Application Security?

Check Point CloudGuard WAF's primary use is protecting web applications and APIs from application layer attacks in the cloud. I also use it to protect public-facing apps.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Compared 12% of the time

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Compared 10% of the time

AWS WAF vs Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Compared 10% of the time

Imperva Application Security Platform vs Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Compared 9% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Compared 8% of the time

More Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) Competitors

SonarQube vs Kiuwan

Compared 21% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 11% of the time

GitHub vs Kiuwan

Compared 7% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 7% of the time

Snyk vs Kiuwan

Compared 5% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Download Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) product report

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) report

Download Kiuwan product report

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec

No data available

Overview

Check Point WAF uses AI-driven threat prevention with seamless API integration, offering advanced DDoS protection. It auto-learns attack patterns, updates protection, and minimizes false positives. Its interface simplifies policy management for secure web applications across cloud environments.

Check Point WAF combines AI-driven threat detection with streamlined policy management to provide effective security for web applications and APIs. It offers zero-day protection, threat intelligence, and advanced DDoS protection. Users enjoy robust logging and compliance management across multi-cloud environments. Integration is smooth, with reduced reliance on signatures, facilitating multi-layer security. Despite its strengths, users note areas for improvement, such as latency and pricing, and call for enhancements in API security, real-time monitoring, and reporting. Challenges include integration complexity and limited technical support accessibility. Effective application security across dynamic environments is a key offering.

What are Check Point WAF's key features?

AI-Driven Threat Prevention: Utilizes AI to identify and block threats, minimizing false positives.
Seamless API Integration: Ensures integration into existing infrastructures without delays.
Advanced DDoS Protection: Safeguards against large-scale attacks to maintain service availability.
Auto-Learning Capability: Continuously adapts to new threat patterns for improved security.
User-Friendly Management: Simplifies policy and compliance management tasks.

What benefits can users expect from Check Point WAF?

Extensive Logging: Enables comprehensive analysis and auditing through detailed records.
Reduced Total Cost of Ownership: Provides cost-effective security measures in cloud environments.
Zero-Day Protection: Offers proactive defense against unidentified vulnerabilities.
Streamlined Deployment: Reduces deployment times with easy integration processes.
Robust Multi-Layer Security: Reinforces application security without heavy reliance on signatures.

Check Point WAF finds particular relevance in industries requiring robust cybersecurity measures such as finance, healthcare, and e-commerce. These sectors benefit from its advanced threat detection and adaptive security policy management, crucial for securing sensitive data across multi-cloud infrastructures. By managing API usage efficiently, it helps maintain regulatory compliance while ensuring optimal operation. Enhanced traffic logging and malware threat management add to its appeal for organizations focusing on securing transactions and sensitive information.

Check Point Software Technologies

Software analytics technology with a breadth of third party integrations that takes into account the wealth of applications your teams are currently using.

We facilitate and encourage work between unlocalized teams. We understand the complexity of working on multi technology environments, constantly striving to increase the number of programming languages and technologies we support.

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto

DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Kiuwan