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

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF has been especially helpful here, automatically learning and adjusting protection without requiring constant manual tuning."
"In short, Check Point CloudGuard WAF is a powerful tool."
"The DirectStorage gives me a vision that I did not have of the check that occurs on the web servers."
"I have thousands of exposed websites and APIs. Being able to control what is happening and try to prevent any attack is the best feature."
"The solution offers continuous security monitoring and alerting, which can help organizations detect and respond to security incidents in real time."
"It seamlessly protects through machine learning, giving us visibility into potential attacks and where they come from."
"By using a cloud application security solution, our company can save costs by reducing the need for additional security hardware and software and improving operational efficiency."
"The communication between the on-premises device and the cloud for analysis and feedback is a valuable feature."
"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."
"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."
"The ability to create firewalls online has been most valuable including the ability to create rules."
"SecureX enables us to have all the threat intelligence and threat event data in one place."
"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."
"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

"The reporting can be improved."
"I do not know if it is already there, but I would like to have complete visibility between the posture management and firewall as a service."
"Multi-tenancy is an area where Check Point has room for improvement."
"The UI interface needs improvement because there are a number of bugs. Integration with the SIEM platform is currently one of the key challenges that need to be addressed."
"For the next release, I would suggest considering features like enhanced threat intelligence integration."
"Deeper and more transparent integration between Cloud Application Security and analysis monitoring tools could be very valuable - although the solution currently offers integrations with third-party security tools."
"I would like to be able to integrate the theme of Artificial Intelligence to help review issues and to monitor and view the security issue while also suggesting and interpreting and additionally configuring solutions - basically, acting as an interpreter."
"They should improve in the delivery of more detailed reports with more information."
"The front-end work controls the new algorithm and the firewall rules. The search feature of these rules could be improved."
"The documentation can be improved and the on-prem integration. The set of applications that it was integrated with wasn't comprehensive."
"The playbooks provided with the product are great, although I would appreciate having more playbooks available. Threats are constantly evolving, so having access to updated playbooks is crucial."
"Remediation stuff could be integrated into the product's automation."
"I'm not sure that I would call it a bug, but sometimes the solution is a little slow."
"One of the improvements the product needs is more integration with collaboration platforms."
"They could put in more third-party [integrations]... also more playbooks, out-of-the-box, for automation [would be helpful]."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If the pricing for the Infinity platform covers everything, it would be more straightforward. I had a hard time selling it to our CEO as a former CFO because of the differentials. There are different deltas year to year over a five-year period. It is very difficult to explain. It would be easier to digest for our executives if there was a flatter scale"
"The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."
"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."
"As Infiniti customers, the pricing is manageable, as we have allowances dedicated to each Check Point product. The price is not as high compared to other options I have dealt with in the past."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."
"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."
"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."
"For the value you get, the pricing of the solution is excellent."
"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."
"It would be nice if they had a different pricing model. Most of our budget for projects goes towards Cisco."
"It comes free with all Cisco products. So, it is a good price."
"It is free. It can't get any better than that."
"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.
884,012 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.
884,012 professionals have used our research since 2012.