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

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
55
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (4th), 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

"The solution's ability to handle multiple websites and applications without needing more expensive hardware is a key advantage."
"The solution offers continuous security monitoring and alerting, which can help organizations detect and respond to security incidents in real time."
"The best feature of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is advanced threat prevention integrated with Check Point threat cloud intelligence, which provides real-time protection against web application attacks including zero-day threats, automatically receiving updates from the threat cloud and analyzing millions of indicators of compromise daily."
"The price of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is not expensive, as it was the cheapest solution we found."
"Support is the same with on-premise devices, and it is very good. Since it is cloud-based, I do not need them as much."
"The solution's strongest point is that you can connect everything to it, giving you a full view of what's connected."
"With the solution, we managed to obtain complete comprehensive visibility of the entire environment in the cloud, thus having better control of each of the resources."
"The first valuable feature is that it is not a complex process to get it up and running. It was not complex at all. We were in a close relationship with the team that developed the app, and it worked in a few hours. The second valuable feature is the information that comes out of it."
"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."
"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."
"SecureX takes all the separate pieces of security within your company, adds in intelligence from different sites and services on the internet, and makes them work together."
"One of the most valuable features is the simplicity of deploying SecureX. It's very easy to do that and then you gain very detailed visibility into everything that's going on in your network and, obviously, at the device level. There's just a wealth of information that you can pull from all of these products that are part of SecureX. You know exactly if you have an issue or not."
"It has evolved a lot, just that monitoring piece to the current Orchestrator piece. The additional analytics are there. They now have something called Insight, which can basically take data from Microsoft Azure AD and Intune to give us information about our endpoints. This is detailed information about the endpoints, from Secure Endpoint and all these different products. So, it is just constantly evolving. Every time that it evolves, we have more information with more visibility. There are more features that we have that just make everything so much easier, and it is in one place. I don't have to keep going back and forth. I don't have to go to Secure Endpoint and ISE to get the data. I don't have to go to Intune on Microsoft to get the information. It is all in one place."
"Integrates well with our existing security infrastructure."
"The automation and orchestration tools are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to manage all the applications and visibility. For example, if there is malware, spam, or another component that wants to attack the company in my servers, network, or applications, then SecureX will react to the problem."
 

Cons

"Cost reduction and trial period extension should be considered with some lucrative discount offerings in buying standard versions."
"The user interface can be improved, especially for 1st time user."
"In my experience, Check Point CloudGuard WAF is a strong solution but could be improved in a few areas, such as simplifying and customizing the user interface and reporting dashboard, making integration with third-party SIEM or monitoring tools easier for quick correlation of WAF events, and making policy tuning and configuration more straightforward for new users."
"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."
"The user interface, SmartConsole, sometimes malfunctions and requires a restart."
"Pricing is high, although possibly justified by the service received."
"The web user interface needs some improvement, even though the functionality is good."
"The documentation of each of the tools that they offer needs to be better."
"They could put in more third-party [integrations]... also more playbooks, out-of-the-box, for automation [would be helpful]."
"Enhancing automation capabilities could further improve the product."
"what's missing right now is the multi-tenant capability."
"The automation and orchestration could be simpler. It could be that all the other parts are that easy to use so that these stick out as a negative, but that's the trickiest part for us. The workflows within the orchestration are just a bit more difficult."
"For us, the biggest sticking point is that the product is not being designed for multi-tenancy use at present, from an MSP perspective."
"One of the improvements the product needs is more integration with collaboration platforms."
"If they could make the Cisco Umbrella piece a little bit more advanced or easier to manage, that would help. We use it for filtering and when you compare it to a normal content filter, it lacks some functionality."
"The front-end work controls the new algorithm and the firewall rules. The search feature of these rules could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."
"The base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."
"I work for an Indian banking client. In India, companies are on a budget. The company liked Check Point very much, but it was a little bit costly compared to FortiWeb. However, it had more features compared to FortiWeb."
"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It comes free with all Cisco products. So, it is a good price."
"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."
"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."
"For the value you get, the pricing of the solution is excellent."
"It would be nice if they had a different pricing model. Most of our budget for projects goes towards Cisco."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
884,076 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Computer Software Company
20%
Marketing Services Firm
11%
Government
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business34
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CloudGuard for Application Security?
We have not had any incidents. We could realize its benefits immediately. We watched and monitored the traffic, and it was amazing to see the results.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
The setup cost was taken with the head of the department, who handled the pricing and everything.
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
Check Point could improve or add more flexibility when it comes to migrating to different sites. Multi-tenancy is an area where Check Point has room for improvement.
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, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: February 2026.
884,076 professionals have used our research since 2012.