

AWS WAF and Check Point WAF compete in the web application firewall category. AWS WAF seems to have the upper hand due to its strong integration with AWS services and effective security features, although it has room for improvement in usability and cost. In contrast, Check Point WAF is recognized for its advanced threat prevention and reduced false positives, with suggestions for improved setup and reporting capabilities.
Features: AWS WAF offers a highly configurable rules system for advanced security options, integration with AWS services, and ease of deployment. Check Point WAF, formerly CloudGuard WAF, is noted for AI-driven threat prevention, Zero-Day attack protection, and advanced bot protection.
Room for Improvement: AWS WAF users face challenges with rule complexity, third-party rule costs, documentation, and UI flexibility. Check Point WAF is seen as complex initially, with limited documentation and calls for pricing flexibility, latency reduction, and enhanced reporting.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: AWS WAF offers seamless deployment within public cloud structures and has generally good support. Check Point WAF provides versatile deployment options but has a steeper learning curve; its technical support is well-regarded despite some language support limitations.
Pricing and ROI: AWS WAF is seen as reasonably priced with a pay-as-you-go model, offer good ROI by enhancing security. Check Point WAF is considered more expensive but cost-effective due to comprehensive security features and reduced false positives, providing satisfactory ROI for complex needs.
With AWS WAF, it is easier for us to block unwanted malicious DDoS attacks and threats from coming into our web application.
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.
Resolving issues can take time because the support personnel may lack product expertise, leading to delays.
They reach out when you send them a ticket, and within 24 hours or less, someone is able to get back to you to solve your problem.
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.
AWS WAF does scale in the sense that it is fully managed and has automatic scaling.
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.
Since it protects web applications from common attacks such as SQL injection and XSS, it is very stable.
In terms of reliability, I would rate AWS WAF about six out of ten due to the need for improved signature sets.
We faced issues with AWS WAF when writing the custom rules.
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.
Compared to firewalls, WAFs generally provide limited stateful analysis capabilities.
The way we see it now is just mentioned as a percentage from bots and actual users, which should include proper graphs and detailed information.
The level of granularity is not great, and as you cross a certain threshold, the cost goes up by twenty or thirty percent every time.
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.
Due to our status as an AWS shop, AWS WAF is cost-effective for us, and we benefit from discounts due to our extensive use of AWS services.
The licensing cost for AWS WAF is just pay-as-you-go; it is a service-based model.
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 biggest benefit of AWS WAF for us is to filter malicious requests, so we can protect our environment and application from malicious actors.
It has also helped to improve the posture of our application, prevent all DDoS attacks, and unnecessary traffic and SQL injection that is reducing the performance of our application.
The specific outcomes showing how AWS WAF has helped our organization include improving our security posture by reducing the attack surface and reducing malicious attacks.
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.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) | 2.0% |
| AWS WAF | 4.2% |
| Other | 93.8% |


| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 22 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 28 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 56 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 22 |
| Large Enterprise | 36 |
AWS WAF provides configurable rules, integration with AWS services, and scalable protection against web threats like SQL injections and DDoS attacks. Its automation and reliable performance are highly valued by users.
AWS WAF is a web application firewall offering significant security features like geo-restriction, custom rules, and IP filtering. Designed for seamless orchestration within AWS environments, it facilitates easy configuration and threat automation. Users benefit from its security policies, enhancing application performance by protecting against threats such as cross-site scripting. Despite its strengths, there is a call for enhanced user interfaces, better documentation, flexible pricing, and improved support. Expanding features like real-time analysis, bot protection, and AI integration can further elevate its utility.
What are the key features of AWS WAF?AWS WAF is extensively used in industries hosting applications on AWS, protecting sensitive data, and monitoring for unauthorized access. Custom and managed rules help cater to infrastructure needs, serving a vital role in maintaining application security across various sectors.
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.
We monitor all Web Application Firewall (WAF) 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.