Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 9, 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

SentinelOne Singularity Clo...
Sponsored
Ranking in Cloud and Data Center Security
3rd
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (5th), Container Security (3rd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (1st)
Akamai Guardicore Segmentation
Ranking in Cloud and Data Center Security
1st
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
11th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Breach and Attack Simulation (BAS) (4th), Microsegmentation Software (3rd)
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP
Ranking in Cloud and Data Center Security
9th
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (9th), Container Security (9th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (5th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (5th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (6th), Compliance Management (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Cloud and Data Center Security category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is 23.9%, up from 22.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is 1.2%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud and Data Center Security
 

Featured Reviews

Andrew W - PeerSpot reviewer
Tells us about vulnerabilities as well as their impact and helps to focus on real issues
Looking at all the different pieces, it has got everything we need. Some of the pieces we do not even use. For example, we do not have Kubernetes Security. We are not running any K8 clusters, so it is good for us. Overall, we find the solution to be fantastic. There can be additional education components. This may not be truly fair to them because of what the product is going for, but it would be great to see additional education for compliance. It is not a criticism of the tool per se, but anything to help non-development resources understand some of the complexities of the cloud is always appreciated. Any additional educational resources are always helpful for security teams, especially those without a development background.
KlavsThaarup - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers micro segmentation capabilities and easy to setup
It's micro-segmentation The label-based segmentation is the most valuable feature. There are always areas for improvement. It doesn't support a PAAC solution (Platforma as a service) in the cloud. So that could be improved. In future releases, I would like to see more integration with other…
Bart Coddens - PeerSpot reviewer
Evolved cloud security with active monitoring but needs interface consistency
The user interface needs work. Sometimes, it is a transition from the old tool to the new CNAPP Two that I currently have, and remnants of the old environment can still be detected. I require consistency in the user interface to ensure everything is streamlined into the same look and feel. More work is needed in fine-tuning the threat data towards your CSPM and activity logs, aligning them with business intelligence, which requires a cohesive console interface. My assessment of CloudGuard CDRs in intrusion detection and threat hunting capabilities is that it still needs some work. All the threat data that comes in, you need to fine tune it a bit.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I recommend SentinelOne due to its high-security capabilities, which are essential to safeguard data and systems from potential threats."
"It has a user-friendly dashboard that I can access without any difficulty."
"The dashboard is intuitive in terms of design and functionality. Additionally, it gives me an email for all the findings that are open."
"The cloud misconfiguration feature and Offensive Security Engine, as well as their alerting process, are valuable."
"It used to guide me about an alert. There is something called an alert guide. I used to click on the alert guide, and I could read everything. I could read about the alert and how to resolve it. I used to love that feature."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's most valuable feature is its unified console."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security stands out for its user-friendly interface and intuitive software, making it easy to navigate and use."
"All the features we use are equal and get the job done."
"The interface and dashboard are amazing."
"The most valuable features of the solution are the maps and ring fencing that help monitor events."
"Its deception features are great, providing a rich telemetry of lured origins, and are a great resource for any active defense strategy."
"We like the centralized management of the firewalls. Until we installed Guardicore Centra, we managed all our firewalls individually, so making changes was complicated, difficult, and time-consuming."
"The solution is very scalable, especially when connected to the cloud resources."
"Application Ring-Fencing and Deception Server, which is basically like a honeypot, are pretty useful features."
"Guardicore makes its own rule set automatically, so we can work fast when creating a rule set."
"Guardicore Centra offers the best coverage specifically in backward compatibility with legacy operating systems."
"The system has deployed security tools to enhance effective investigations in the entire company networking system."
"The product allows us to enhance the security of the implementations we have."
"The solution has intelligence that integrates with a range of threat intelligence feeds, including Check Point's ThreatCloud, to provide real-time intelligence on emerging threats."
"It saves time because I can look across the organization. Instead of checking 50 different accounts atomically and spending 15 minutes investigating each, I can spend 15 minutes exploring all 50 accounts. It allows me to quickly look across the org for similar problems when one comes up. That's a huge time saver."
"It has great scalability."
"This solution has saved the company from unnecessary data loss that occurs due to cyber attacks."
"We like the GSL Builder feature. When you're running a security operations center, you spend a lot of time monitoring endpoint activity to ensure there is no malicious traffic or anonymous access in the environment. The GSL Builder is helpful for deep investigations of a particular reason for an incident. You can use it to get more information."
"The visibility in our cloud environment is the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"While SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security offers real-time response, there is room for improvement in alert accuracy."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security takes four to five hours to detect and highlight an issue, and that time should be reduced."
"The cost has the potential for improvement."
"I would like SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security's detections to be openly available online instead of only accessible through their portal. Other tools have detections that are openly available without going through the tool."
"The Singularity Cloud Security console is experiencing delays in clearing resolved issues, which can take over an hour to be removed from the display."
"One of our use cases was setting up a firewall for our endpoints, specifically for our remote users... We were hoping to utilize SentinelOne's firewall capabilities, but there were limitations on how many URLs we could implement. Because of those limitations on the number of URLs, we weren't able to utilize that feature in the way we had hoped to."
"A vulnerability alert would appear, and we'd fix it, but then the same alert would return the next day."
"A few YouTube videos could be helpful. There isn't a lot of information out there to look at."
"Guardicore Centra should incorporate automation so that we don't require to write custom scripts and APIs. The tool also has limitations on rules where it allows only sixty thousand rules. Our clients have also commented that there are too many manual clicks and effort to do changes. I think that the incorporation of automation can help our clients make changes with confidence and without the possibility of human error."
"The maps could go a bit faster. They are useful but slightly slow."
"Kubernetes is not installed in the way we need it."
"Customers would want to see the cost improved."
"The product needs a few features like enhanced user policies and payload-level inspection to improve the offering."
"The long-term management of the security policies could be improved with some kind of automation platform, something like Chef or Puppet or Ansible, to help you manage the policies after day-one... to then manage the policies and changes to those policies, going forward, through some type of automation process is not turning out to be really easy."
"Needs more customization of honeypots and a vaster catalog of systems able to be mimicked."
"I would rate the stability a six out of ten, where one is low and ten is high stability."
"The tool has a lot of potential, but today, it lacks a lot of Scripts/Bots for Azure."
"For businesses with varied IT ecosystems, increasing the integration capabilities with additional third-party products and services would increase flexibility and user-friendliness."
"I am not a technical person, but generically, the user interface can be a little more intuitive. Our staff has trained network security and cloud security professionals, and they get it, but when you are trying to get to the customers to be able to pick it up and maintain it, it can be a bit difficult."
"I would like to see some AI on the back-end, just to assist with doing analysis and making recommendations."
"Check Point tools need to improve the latency in the portal since they take a long time to load."
"CloudGuard could be improved by including integration with vendors other than AWS, especially Azure, especially in permissions."
"No improvements are needed."
"In general, for the product to be successful, they need to improve security, and configuration detection."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its pricing is constant. It has been constant over the previous year, so I am happy with it. However, price distribution can be better explained. That is the only area I am worried about. Otherwise, the pricing is very reasonable."
"Singularity Cloud Workload Security's pricing is good."
"It was reasonable pricing for me."
"It's not expensive. The product is in its initial growth stages and appears more competitive compared to others. It comes in different variants, and I believe the enterprise version costs around $55 per user per year. I would rate it a five, somewhere fairly moderate."
"SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is on the costlier side."
"It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market."
"We found it to be fine for us. Its price was competitive. It was something we were happy with. We are not a Fortune 500 company, so I do not know how pricing scales at the top end, but for our cloud environment, it works very well."
"The tool is cost-effective."
"The solution is reasonably priced and I would rate it a six out of ten. The tool's licensing costs are yearly."
"The price is the same as other products in the market. There's no price argument to choose one or the other product, it will cost the customer approximately the same."
"The pricing is too high."
"Akamai Guardicore Segmentation is expensive."
"This is not a cheap solution but you have to consider the bigger picture, which is what it is giving you."
"The customer would complain about the cost."
"GuardiCore has made some new changes to the license now. We've seen monthly and annual licenses based on a subscription. We have a few clients that pay anywhere from $25,000 a year."
"Compared to the pricing we were seeing from both Illumio and Edgewise, Guardicore was very competitive."
"The pricing is extremely competitive."
"The tool's pricing is moderate. Its licensing costs are yearly."
"The solution’s pricing is a little bit high."
"Licensing and costs are straightforward, as they have a baseline of 100 workloads within one license and no additional charges."
"The license for CloudGuard Posture Management is about $80 a year, and it's based on your cloud footprint, not the number of users. So you could have a million users, and it doesn't matter."
"The pricing is tremendous and super cheap. It is shockingly cheap for what you get out of it. I am happy with that. I hope that doesn't get reported back and they increase the prices. I love the pricing and the licensing makes sense. It is just assets: The more stuff that you have, the more you pay."
"The licensing and costs are straightforward, as they have a baseline of 100 workloads (number of instances) within one license with no additional nor hidden charges. If you want to have 200 workloads under Dome9, then you need to take out two licenses for that. Also, it does not have any impact on cloud billing, as data is shared using the API call. This is well within the limit of free API calls provided by the cloud provider."
"It is a very straightforward licensing model that is based on the number of assets you are discovering and managing with the solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud and Data Center Security solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about PingSafe?
The dashboard gives me an overview of all the things happening in the product, making it one of the tool's best featu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingSafe?
I don't handle the price part, but it isn't more expensive than Palo Alto Prisma Cloud. It's not cheap, but it is wor...
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
There is scope for more application security posture management features. Additionally, the runtime protection needs ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Guardicore Centra?
I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. I know other micro-segmentation t...
What do you like most about Guardicore Infection Monkey?
Initially, I liked the telemetry part. But later, we used the microsegmentation features that we were able to deploy ...
What needs improvement with Guardicore Infection Monkey?
When we have more than one interface, we can only have one policy for both interfaces. Normally, you have assets with...
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Guardicore Centra, GuardiCore
Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Dome9, Check Point CloudGuard Workload Protection, Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Santander, Frontier Airlines, OpenLink, Intermountain Healthcare, Cellcom, BancoBASE
Symantec, Citrix, Car and Driver, Virgin, Cloud Technology Partners
Find out what your peers are saying about Akamai Guardicore Segmentation vs. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.