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

Check Point Web Gateway vs Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

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 Web Gateway
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
19th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Sangfor Internet Access Gat...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
31st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of Check Point Web Gateway is 1.4%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) is 0.8%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Check Point Web Gateway1.4%
Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)0.8%
Other97.8%
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

KT
Senior Security Consultant at Orange Cyberdefense
Has improved threat visibility and centralized management but needs wider feature support
We have not worked much with granular control over web usage policies, so I cannot provide detailed feedback. We have not worked with the effectiveness of the multi-layered defense approach in threat prevention. Their product coverage is not as extensive as some competitors. They have fewer products and features compared to competitors. Support for operational technology (OT) is not as comprehensive in Check Point Web Gateway as it is in competing products.
Muhammad Asif Shaikh - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy GM - IT at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Designed to provide comprehensive and secure internet access with high visibility into users
After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with its own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"SmartConsole is intuitive."
"One of its rather outstanding capabilities is its ability to add an extra layer of protection to our company's internal network."
"The best thing about Check Point Web Gateway is the usability and the GUI."
"Application control allows the administrator to create granular policies based on users to allow, block, or limit access."
"For security concerns, Check Point Web Security is the best solution with features such as URL filtering, application control, and antivirus."
"The Check Point Web Gateway is a great security asset, providing the website and application control our organization needs."
"Check Point Web Gateway offers a basic bundle that includes numerous solutions, covering about 50% of customer tasks."
"The most valuable feature that I see in the application is the filtering of the URLs."
"The most significant aspect is the control it offers over internet traffic, like managing computer access to specific sites such as Facebook. I find particular value in its ability to control the depth of internal traffic, enabling actions like blocking specific file extensions on social media or specific IPs. This control by categories is a standout feature for us in Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)."
"The solution is interoperable and has centralized management."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
 

Cons

"Check Point Web Gateway could improve the graphical user interface to make it more appealing."
"Perhaps the latency in the administrative part of the portal would be a point of improvement."
"Deployment issues on Linux have been noted, especially with agents on endpoints."
"What I don't appreciate about Check Point Web Gateway is that sometimes we encounter problems with them asking too many questions."
"We understand that if we want to see greater connections, greater services, and a greater capacity established for primary equipment, this solution needs to evolve to make an application installed directly on equipment."
"The support must be faster."
"The product requires prior knowledge and information and would be difficult for an engineer with minimal experience to understand."
"There is room for improvement in support because the solution needs multiple regions to reach certain features and validations."
"In Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG), its speed is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The solution's logging system should be improved because its logs are not precise and are a little confusing."
"After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with their own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the tool's price as a seven out of ten."
"The product is not cheap. It is expensive."
"Our customers pay a licensing fee annually or once in three or five years, per their requirements."
"It is expensive. Licensing is on a yearly basis. You need to do the support subscription."
"The price is very high."
"The price is on the higher side, even when compared to Azure Firewall Premium."
"There is a need to make yearly payments towards the licensing charges attached to the product. The product is neither too expensive nor too cheap, so it comes at a good price point for my company."
"This program is very, very expensive."
"The solution’s pricing is cheaper than any other solution."
"It is one of the reason for choosing it over other available products. However, recently, this year, there have been recurring concerns. I believe we might consider migrating to another solution."
"I rate the product pricing a five or six out of ten on a scale of one to ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Healthcare Company
9%
Government
9%
Construction Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise7
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Check Point Web Gateway?
It will be the same pricing as other solutions. Fortinet is the cheaper product, while Palo Alto and Check Point Web Gateway are similarly priced.
What needs improvement with Check Point Web Gateway?
As of now, I did not notice any significant areas for improvement. The interface of Check Point Web Gateway is far better than others and gives a complete and detailed manner of reports, which is v...
What is your primary use case for Check Point Web Gateway?
My main use case for Check Point Web Gateway was web filtering and application control. When I want to block social media, gambling websites, or any adult content, I use advanced web filtering in C...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Morton Salt, Medical Advocacy and Outreach, BH Telecom, Lightbeam Health Solutions, X by Orange, Cadence, Nihondentsu, Datastream Connexion, Good Sam, Omnyway, FIASA, Pacific Life, Banco del Pacifico, Control Southern, Xero, Centrify, Tradair, Laterlite, Phoenix International, Unisinos, Wilkin Chapman, Connexus Energy, Mutua Universal, Smart & Final, Central New Mexico Community Colleg, Grupo Financiero Multiva
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point Web Gateway vs. Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.