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

Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs Symantec Storage Protection comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
107
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (6th), Cloud and Data Center Security (5th), Container Security (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (3rd), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (3rd), Compliance Management (3rd)
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (9th), Cloud and Data Center Security (9th), Container Security (7th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (5th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (5th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (4th), Compliance Management (6th)
Symantec Storage Protection
Ranking in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
38th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) category, the mindshare of SentinelOne Singularity Cloud Security is 2.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is 2.6%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Storage Protection is 0.1%, down from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP)
 

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.
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.
reviewer1177905 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good technical support, secures our services and mobile devices against malware
We use this solution as a firewall to protect against malware The most valuable features of this solution are the advanced firewall and malware prevention. The mobile device solution is very good. One of the areas that this solution can be improved is in Behavioural monitoring. In the next…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We noted immediate benefits from using the solution."
"We liked the search bar in PingSafe. It is a global search. We were able to get some insights from there."
"SentinelOne's behaviour analytics are valuable because they detect anomalies and malicious behaviour that signature-based solutions might miss."
"The ease of use of the platform is very nice."
"Singularity Cloud Security's most valuable features are its ease of scalability and comprehensive security measures."
"Singularity Cloud Security's most valuable features are its ease of scalability and comprehensive security measures."
"All the features we use are equal and get the job done."
"As a frequently audited company, we value PingSafe's compliance monitoring features. They give us a report with a compliance score for how well we meet certain regulatory standards, like HIPAA. We can show our compliance as a percentage. It's also a way to show that we are serious about security."
"The user interface is responsive and quite intuitive; when selecting an object it automatically shows the relevant actions."
"The most valuable feature is the separate environment."
"The audit feature is the most valuable for compliance reasons. It gives you a full view of the whole environment, no matter how many accounts you have in AWS or Azure. You have it all under one umbrella."
"It provides critical insights that enable the IT team to plan and launch smart investigations when there are security breaches."
"The visibility in our cloud environment is the most valuable feature."
"The feature that I value the most about Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is the possibility of checking compliance with different standards. This compliance check can be performed for each subscription or service that we have on all the different cloud providers that we use."
"The ability to drill down to individual hosts on an account and see which ones are affected is valuable."
"All of the features are very useful in today's market."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the advanced firewall and malware prevention."
 

Cons

"The areas with room for improvement include the cost, which is higher compared to other security platforms. The dashboard can also be laggy."
"In some cases, the rules are strictly enforced but do not align with real-world use cases."
"When we request any changes, they must be reflected in the next update."
"They can add more widgets to its dashboard. A centralized dashboard with numerous metrics would improve user understanding."
"It took us a while to configure the software to work well in this type of environment, as the support documents were not always clear."
"Maybe container runtime security could be improved."
"We use PingSafe and also SentinelOne. If PingSafe integrated some of the endpoint security features of SentinelOne, it would be the perfect one-stop solution for everything. We wouldn't need to switch between the products. At my organization, I am responsible for endpoint security and vulnerability management. Integrating both functions into one application would be ideal because I could see all the alerts, heat maps, and reports in one console."
"It would be really helpful if the solution improves its agent deployment process."
"The user interface could be improved. Sometimes, the visibility is not immediately available for the environment. We have the native servers that come with the solutions, but we cannot see them in the Check Point log. Another issue is with the integrated file monitoring. It would make sense to have stuff like file integrity monitoring and malware scanning available within this module because we don't want to integrate another product."
"The setup can be better. With every other Check Point product, the setup is scripted. You just approve versions, and then you are off. The setup for this solution is still very much manual. I would like to see that transition to more of a scripted setup."
"Timely updates and upgrades to meet modern technological changes could help improve performance and limit the chances of downtime."
"When rules change, it messes up the remediation. They haven't found a fix for that yet. The remediation rule goes into limbo. It's an architectural design flaw within their end compliance engine—a serious bug."
"The dashboard customization has room for improvement."
"It does not support on-premise deployments such as VMware Tanzu, and this has been a major drawback when it comes to integrations with some applications."
"There are opportunities for improvement that can be addressed through a roadmap."
"The rules are not well-tuned, and many of them generate false positives or nonsensical results."
"One of the areas that this solution can be improved is in Behavioural monitoring."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the cost a seven out of ten with ten being the most costly."
"SentinelOne provided competitive pricing compared to other vendors, and we are satisfied with the deal."
"Their pricing appears to be based simply on the number of accounts we have, which is common for cloud-based products."
"PingSafe is not very expensive compared to Prisma Cloud, but it's also not that cheap. However, because of its features, it makes sense to us as a company. It's fairly priced."
"It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market."
"Singularity Cloud Workload Security's licensing and price were cheaper than the other solutions we looked at."
"PingSafe's pricing is good because it provides us with a solution."
"We have an enterprise license. It is affordable. I'm not sure, but I think we pay 150,000 rupees per month."
"Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is expensive."
"The price is on the higher end."
"​They support either annual licensing or hourly. At the time of our last negotiation, it was either one or the other, you could not mix or match. I would have liked to mix/match. ​"
"It is a very straightforward licensing model that is based on the number of assets you are discovering and managing with the solution."
"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."
"Right now, we have licenses on 500 machines, and they are not cheap."
"Licensing and costs are straightforward, as they have a baseline of 100 workloads within one license and no additional charges."
"CloudGuard is fairly priced."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) solutions are best for your needs.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
5%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
University
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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?
It is cost-effective compared to other solutions in the market.
What needs improvement with PingSafe?
In version 2, a lot of rules have been deployed for Kubernetes security and CDR, which makes a lot of issues of criti...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

PingSafe
Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management, Dome9, Check Point CloudGuard Workload Protection, Check Point CloudGuard Intelligence
Symantec Cloud Workload Protection for Storage
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Symantec, Citrix, Car and Driver, Virgin, Cloud Technology Partners
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Microsoft and others in Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP). Updated: March 2025.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.