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

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs Polyspace Code Prover 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 Application Security Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
76
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (8th), Web Application Firewall (WAF) (5th), DevSecOps (2nd)
Polyspace Code Prover
Ranking in Application Security Tools
31st
Average Rating
7.2
Reviews Sentiment
2.3
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polyspace Code Prover is 1.2%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)0.9%
Polyspace Code Prover1.2%
Other97.9%
Application Security Tools
 

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.
reviewer2760282 - PeerSpot reviewer
General Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Has struggled with performance and integration but supports critical safety verification
Execution speed of the tests and generally the integration into AWS-driven CI work chains or workflows represent how it can be improved in my opinion. Performance issues plus license costs are two main driving factors. The CI environments that we use employ up to around 40,000 virtual CPUs per day in peak, running at the same time. We always have problems distributing licenses accordingly with other products. I can talk to the experts doing the integration, but as far as I know, I was involved with Polyspace Code Prover and we had a lot of difficulties integrating it into our Bazel-driven CI toolchain, plus integrating it on the AWS environments in Linux that we use. It was much more straightforward using Code Sonar there. The reason is the execution speed, integration with Azure and stuff, and pricing. The CI integration and maybe a better-suited license model for CI-driven execution are other areas I recommend improving. That's something we discussed with all of the software companies whose products we use, such as compilers. We have a lot of parallel builds, and each call to a license server is actually problematic in the long run.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have had a number of real events where developers accidentally made commits of API keys, and we were able to detect and begin response actions in minutes. We had the API key revoked in less than five minutes in such events."
"You can maintain a legal framework structure at all times."
"The solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies effectively."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security enabled us to develop strength and process efficiency coupled with a secure environment in the IT system."
"Having a cloud detection response helps to very quickly identify security threats in our environment."
"On the endpoint side, the most valuable feature is undoubtedly the cloud-based management capability, along with the ransomware protection, despite not encountering any instances so far."
"User attitude reviews help us keep all online users compliant with company regulations and policies."
"Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is a SaaS platform that gives unified cloud-native security across my applications, workloads, and network, allowing me to automate security, prevent threats, ensure compliance, and manage my security posture well across all my cloud environments."
"Efficiency and speed are the advantages I see in Code Sonar over Polyspace Code Prover."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
 

Cons

"There are occasions when it interfaces with other systems, leading to a loss of visibility."
"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."
"It was costlier than other solutions."
"A gap for improvement for Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is the learning curve, as better training modules could help end customers, and pricing and reporting functionality could also be improved."
"The negative aspect is that Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) uses Check Point Harmony in its management console, which sometimes creates latency when connecting to or opening the platform."
"A feature we'd like to see in the future is something that could protect against other attack vectors, with a focus on application protection."
"The reporting can be improved."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is a strong solution, but there are a few areas where it could be improved, particularly the user interface for managing custom rules and exceptions, which could be more intuitive and streamlined to reduce the learning curve for new users, especially when deploying for the first time."
"I'm still trying to use constraints with range propagation, but I can't get it to work properly, and I haven't found any documentation."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"The tool has some stability issues."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"Because we had difficulties in efficiently integrating Polyspace Code Prover into our CI toolchain, these tests are mostly run manually and only occasionally."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."
"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."
"The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"I find the pricing to be reasonable."
"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."
"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."
"We use the paid version."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools 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%
Manufacturing Company
35%
Aerospace/Defense Firm
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
Outsourcing Company
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business54
Midsize Enterprise23
Large Enterprise34
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
 

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...
What needs improvement with Polyspace Code Prover?
Execution speed of the tests and generally the integration into AWS-driven CI work chains or workflows represent how it can be improved in my opinion. Performance issues plus license costs are two ...
What is your primary use case for Polyspace Code Prover?
It is validation for Functional Safety applications in automotive.
What advice do you have for others considering Polyspace Code Prover?
We are actually trying to consolidate everything into one solution. To reduce, that might also be a new solution, but we're not currently actively looking for that. It's just that we'd prefer to fi...
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec, Check Point CloudGuard Code Security
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Polyspace Code Prover and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.