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

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs Comodo cWatch comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 16, 2026

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

Cloudflare Web Application ...
Sponsored
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
5th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Check Point WAF (formerly C...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (5th)
Comodo cWatch
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
27th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
CDN (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is 4.7%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is 2.4%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Comodo cWatch is 1.2%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cloudflare Web Application Firewall4.7%
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)2.4%
Comodo cWatch1.2%
Other91.7%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

DB
CTO at PlayNirvana
Advanced security reporting has protected high-traffic betting platforms from constant attacks
I don't see room for improvement to Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. One thing I don't know much about because we have a dedicated IT team for that, and I'm not involved with Cloudflare much anymore. But if I were to compare them to F5, I would like to see more features that F5 offers. F5 has an option to bring the whole infrastructure, the whole WAF and all their packages, Bot Management, and everything else on your infrastructure. You need to install certain services from their side, and then you can choose if you would like requests to hit your servers immediately or if requests need to be proxied through F5 backbone. That would be a nice addition because we have 90% of the traffic as legit traffic coming from whitelisted servers. If it comes from whitelisted servers, I don't need to go every request through the backbone; I could easily just IP whitelist everything. Then I could maybe have Bot Management on my infrastructure that drastically reduces the price of Cloudflare. I would like to see Push CDN more improved in the next release of Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. And maybe something similar to Pushpin that Fastly has, which is an option where you can push messages that then can be scaled globally over the network. From our perspective, if we have a listener that listens for stock updates, I would just need to have one processor that pushes those updates to the Cloudflare API, and then Cloudflare would broadcast that message to all listeners. Cloudflare will check the order of the message, and if you, as a customer, are not connected or have some kind of network issue, when you reconnect, you will receive the latest state and missing updates.
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.
Bernardo Murillo - PeerSpot reviewer
Director De Netquatro at Netquatro
Alerts organizations if any malware is detected and removes it quickly
The solution allows me to change my logo. It gives me a white-label portal because I am a partner. OWASP has been the most effective in malware prevention. It can detect if the headers are okay and do FTP scans. We get alerts if we have some malware. It is removed very quickly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Very glad the WAF rulesets works out of box, and requires very little tuning or maintenance."
"I'm highly satisfied. It's remarkably user-friendly, enabling me to quickly identify issues, and deploy solutions, and it offers the necessary features."
"The product has a valuable security control functionality."
"Technical support has a very fast response time and they are helpful."
"For us, the key feature of Cloudflare is DDoS protection and IP hiding, especially since we are a crypto company."
"This is a good product; it's reliable and scales well."
"I have not had any issues with this solution, and I would recommend it to others who are interested in using it."
"It is a SaaS solution unlike much of the competition."
"One of the best features of CloudGuard WAF is its user-friendly GUI dashboard."
"I rate it ten out of ten."
"The tool's most valuable feature is AI, which makes operations easier. Moreover, it is easy to deploy."
"It is a highly scalable solution with a quick turnaround time for deployment and running of the software across any IT system."
"With CloudGuard WAF, I have peace of mind, because most of the features are AI-based, and there is not much configuration that needs to be done on my side."
"User attitude reviews help us keep all online users compliant with company regulations and policies."
"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."
"It provides security for our customers and our products."
"We get alerts if we have some malware."
"They took my website under their surveillance, scanned the website for infection, detected the incident, and removed it in a jiff."
"My customers see ROI in the sense that their whole environment is secure."
"The solution is very good and I feel more secure under this than I did under Symantec or McAfee."
"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
"The FIM feature, the information in the new management system, and their support are the most valuable features. The scanned results are quite fast as compared to other platforms compared to scanning timing. It takes about a minute or two minutes. Also, the results of the Comodo scan results are in detail."
 

Cons

"The blocked logs are difficult to read at times."
"The reporting could be more granular."
"I have experienced some difficulties with Cloudflare's support as a customer based in India."
"Cloudflare should update the version of the ModSecurity core rule set that they run on."
"Support can be challenging at times."
"The platform's control features related to real-time authentication and response time need improvement."
"They need to improve their support because getting a response for basic requests took around 48 hours, which is too long."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall should include port forwarding features."
"I have faced issues with the tool's blocking aspects. It is hard to open or block web services due to the multitude of cloud centers. I have to do the process manually at times. We have a bug which is hard to solve."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF could be improved by simplifying the initial setup for a faster deployment, making the dashboard and reporting more customizable, and offering a more accessible pricing model."
"They should improve in the delivery of more detailed reports with more information."
"One of the big problems we found in Check Point, in general, is the support."
"It doesn't detect user activity like some of its competitors. It's not a vulnerability, but it's a legitimate activity that it doesn't detect. It only detects vulnerabilities or misconfigurations."
"The User interface can be improved, especially for 1st time user."
"The negative side I see is that while most things about Check Point CloudGuard WAF are really good, there is some latency and performance issues, as it can be slow to log in, especially from different regions."
"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."
"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"Better CDN could be a great thing since this is the best that any website owners would be interested in for protecting their website."
"The portal is a little slow."
"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not too pricey."
"It starts at $20 and can easily go up to $200 monthly"
"The annual licensing fee is $10,000 USD."
"What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing? I believe the pricing is not the best, but it's reasonable and acceptable. We also use the McAfee system in parallel. In terms of pricing, its okay - not great, but not bad either. It falls in the middle, which is acceptable. In terms of support licensing, last time, we were searching for a solution, and we considered products from resellers rather than directly from the cloud provider. However, the pricing we encountered was exceptionally high. As a result, we are inclined to select support from the reseller."
"The solution's pricing option needs to be more transparent for enterprise clients."
"Cloudflare Web Application Firewall is more affordable than other solutions."
"We pay $210 per month for CloudFlare WAF."
"The solution is expensive."
"I find the pricing to be reasonable."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."
"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."
"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."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"The base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."
"Comodo cWatch’s first level, which has fewer features, costs $7."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
23%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business36
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise19
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Cloudflare Web Application Firewall?
I don't see room for improvement to Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. One thing I don't know much about because we...
What is your primary use case for Cloudflare Web Application Firewall?
We are using Cloudflare Web Application Firewall's advanced reporting and analytics tools with their Zero Trust, so e...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
Pricing is a little bit high compared to other OEMs, and the setup cost was handled by a partner.
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF can be improved in several ways. We have faced slowness issues in our network after onboar...
What is your primary use case for CloudGuard for Application Security?
I use Check Point CloudGuard WAF for web application and API protection. I can provide a scenario where I used Check ...
What needs improvement with Comodo cWatch?
The portal is a little slow. I have to wait for it to load all the information. CDN's performance must be improved.
What is your primary use case for Comodo cWatch?
I use the solution to detect vulnerabilities in the site.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Comodo cWatch?
Comodo cWatch’s price is very good compared to Cloudflare’s. The first level of Cloudflare costs us about $20. The ne...
 

Also Known As

Cloudflare WAF
Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
cWatch
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

crunchbase, udacity, marketo, okcupid, zendesk
Orange España, Paschoalotto
Xerox, Intel, HP, UPS, Western Union, Western Digital
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Comodo cWatch and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.