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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Cisco SecureX [EOL] comparison

 

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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (5th), Web Application Firewall (WAF) (8th)
Cisco SecureX [EOL]
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.2
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

MK
CISO at Pink Solutions
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.
Dene Lewis - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Technical Strategy and Direction CAE Technology Services Ltd at CAE Technology Services Limited
A scalable SaaS based platform that helps with cyber threat intelligence and automated hunting
I would rate Cisco SecureX a ten out of ten. I find the product to be a fantastic platform. If you are eligible, start using it straight away. The best way to evaluate it is to start using it and see where it fits within your organization. I think it helps our customers really deliver their SecOps goals, and I see it as a core foundation of CAE's own security strategy going forward. Our partnership with Cisco is one that was built on trust over a long period of time. This has enabled us to work together to be able to provide the solutions that our customers need to drive their organizations forward. The value we add as a reseller is being able to work closer with our customers, understand them, and get intimate with their organizations. That enables us to offer them the right solutions that will help them achieve their goals.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Before CloudGuard, we periodically had some website issues. Since we've had CloudGuard, we've never had these issues happen again."
"It seamlessly protects through machine learning, giving us visibility into potential attacks and where they come from."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF has positively impacted my organization by significantly improving both security and operational efficiency, with a noticeable reduction in web-based threats, especially automated attacks and vulnerability exploits, thanks to its real-time prevention and reputation filter that has streamlined my workflow through automatic policy updates and integration smoothly with my CI/CD pipelines, allowing my DevOps teams to deploy security without delays."
"The features I have found most valuable are the comprehensive threat prevention capabilities, automated policy management, and seamless integration with cloud environments."
"The communication between the on-premises device and the cloud for analysis and feedback is a valuable feature."
"CloudGuard Application Security is a one-stop unified solution for securing workloads and IT assets most efficiently."
"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security helped reduce the cost of ownership for our web application firewall by 50%."
"It is a very scalable and stable solution."
"The most beneficial feature of Cisco SecureX for cybersecurity efforts is its integration with other Cisco solutions and the environment. This sets it apart, as its APIs and overall integration capabilities are very strong. Additionally, its detection capabilities are commendable."
"Using SecureX, a tool provided by Cisco, we can easily integrate it with many of our other Cisco products such as Cisco ISE and many networking devices."
"We've reduced our workload by 20 to 30 percent just from being able to focus on the important things, as this product really does a lot of the grunt work for you."
"I like that I don't have to jump around to five different products and log into five different places to view the data that it returns."
"If management wants to ingest reports at a high level from all of the different products, they would only need one login to SecureX to view this information as opposed to separate logins for each of the integrated products."
"Its cybersecurity and resilience have been extremely important for our organization."
"SecureX definitely provides us with contextual awareness throughout our security ecosystem, since it allows us to integrate multiple threat intelligence feeds, as well as multiple security appliances and platforms."
"SecureX enables us to have all the threat intelligence and threat event data in one place."
 

Cons

"They need improved latency in the main window."
"CloudGuard could improve in areas such as ease of integration with Fortinet and reducing costs associated with deployment in cloud environments like Azure."
"It was costlier than other solutions."
"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."
"One of the big problems we found in Check Point, in general, is the support."
"I have encountered issues with Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's technical support. It also has missing configuration features."
"While the GUI allows configuration for application-related features, specific definitions cannot be modified through the code."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF can be improved; initially, the setup is very complicated, and there's not a lot of documentation available, plus it didn't have something for anti-bot, but other than that, it is fine."
"Enhancing automation capabilities could further improve the product."
"The automation and orchestration could be simpler."
"what's missing right now is the multi-tenant capability."
"They could expand into more areas. The more third-parties that we have tied into it, the better. The capabilities are there. As they just continue to involve the product, the more things that you can look into, then the more analytics that you can get. Also, the more data that we can get, then the better off we will be."
"For us, the biggest sticking point is that the product is not being designed for multi-tenancy use at present, from an MSP perspective."
"If they could make the Cisco Umbrella piece a little bit more advanced or easier to manage, that would help."
"They could expand into more areas."
"For us, the biggest sticking point is that the product is not being designed for multi-tenancy use at present, from an MSP perspective."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."
"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."
"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."
"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."
"The base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."
"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."
"For the value you get, the pricing of the solution is excellent."
"The product is absolutely free to any customer. As such, the only thing one must keep in mind is that as long as he already has one Cisco security product, irregardless of what that product is, SecureX is available for free."
"You can spend less money for another solution, but if you really want to have a good solution you have to pay. We are happy that we are getting such a good solution for what we are spending."
"It would be nice if they had a different pricing model. Most of our budget for projects goes towards Cisco."
"Cisco SecureX is more expensive than Trend Micro. However, considering the integration capabilities with other solutions and the quality of technical support, I believe there's justification for the price difference."
"It is free. It can't get any better than that."
"The pricing is the best part of this solution. It is free if you buy Umbrella or Duo Security. It is also a good solution."
"The pricing is competitive, especially for education institutions. Licensing can be a little bit difficult to navigate, especially with resellers with Cisco, but for us it has been pretty easy."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
886,719 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
26%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
5%
Construction Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Marketing Services Firm
10%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business35
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive. It is a little bit expensive. You cannot avoid this from an Israeli product. Israeli products follow a certain pricing model. If they could reduce the cost ...
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
While Check Point CloudGuard WAF is a strong solution, it could be improved in a few areas such as simplifying and customizing the user interface and reporting database. Improving API security dept...
What is your primary use case for CloudGuard for Application Security?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF's primary use is protecting web applications and APIs from application layer attacks in the cloud. I also use it to protect public-facing apps.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
Kenna.AppSec, Kenna.VI
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
NHS, Rackspace, UNC Pembroke, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Missing Piece
Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: April 2026.
886,719 professionals have used our research since 2012.