Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional comparison

Check Point Software Technologies and PortSwigger are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Check Point Software Technologies is ranked #10 with an average rating of 8.7, while PortSwigger is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.8. Check Point Software Technologies holds a 0.1% mindshare in AS, compared to PortSwigger’s 2.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Check Point Software Technologies users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 98% of PortSwigger users who would recommend it.

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Read 43 Check Point CloudGuard WAF reviews

255 Views
114 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...

Read 63 PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional reviews

3,221 Views
2,172 Comparison Views

98% willing to recommend

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and Check Point CloudGuard WAF are both security solutions competing in vulnerability management and web application security. Burp Suite Professional holds the upper hand in pricing and support satisfaction, while CloudGuard WAF is favored for its advanced feature set, suggesting it may be worth the investment for comprehensive security.

Features: Burp Suite Professional offers robust security vulnerability scanning, intuitive automation to simplify complex testing processes, and effective manual vulnerability detection tools. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is recognized for extensive integration capabilities, real-time threat prevention, and advanced traffic analysis, catering to enterprises with rigorous security demands.

Room for Improvement: Burp Suite Professional could enhance multi-factor authentication, provide more detailed reporting options, and improve user interface design for better accessibility. Check Point CloudGuard WAF users note challenges with configuration simplicity, a need for more comprehensive documentation, and a more straightforward user experience to support complex deployments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Burp Suite Professional is praised for its straightforward deployment, though some users desire more responsive customer service. Check Point CloudGuard WAF, despite being more challenging to deploy, receives positive feedback for its extensive customer support and detailed guidance, which help alleviate deployment complexities.

Pricing and ROI: Burp Suite Professional is often viewed as offering good value with reasonable setup costs leading to a swift return on investment. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is perceived to potentially provide greater long-term value through its expansive capabilities, despite higher setup costs, with ROI justifying the initial investment due to its comprehensive security features.

To learn more, read our detailed Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 847,959 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in Application Security Tools

10th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Web Application Firewall (WAF) (14th)

PortSwigger Burp Suite Prof...

Ranking in Application Security Tools

8th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (6th), Fuzz Testing Tools (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is 2.0%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Dialungana Malungo

Principal Cybersecurity Specialist at Unitel S.A.

Protects our web applications and APIs and has a very low false positive rate

CloudGuard WAF is a very straightforward solution. I do not have to worry about signatures. Most of the solutions that are out there are mainly based on signatures, and I have to do a lot of maintenance to get the signature updates, and sometimes, due to a lack of resources, I am not able to do so. 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. Once set, I only go to CloudGuard WAF to check. I do not have to worry about signatures or updates. Everything is done perfectly, and I have a sense of peace because I know our applications are safe. It is very important for us that CloudGuard WAF protects our applications against threats without relying on signatures. That is definitely one of the key features I need.

Read full review

Anuradha.Kapoor Kapoor

Head - Quality Control at Net Solutions

Offers efficient scanning of entire websites but presence of false positive bugs, leading to time-consuming efforts in distinguishing real bugs from false alarms

We have found that so many times, false positive bugs are there, and then we spend a lot of time basically separating them from real bugs. So that's the reason we are looking for some other tool. So we were in discussion with Acunetix. Therefore, the false positive rate is, like, something that we would like to improve. What we are looking for is if this false positive rate goes down because we were OWASP Zap tool users, which was free anyway. But there were a lot of false positives there, and we used to spend a lot of time, like, for security reasons, reproducing those bugs for the development team to fix it. So then we thought, okay, why not we go with the tool? Even if it is not very expensive. But still, every year, we have to renew the license. And we got this tool. Again, we found that in this tool also, even if it is less, there are still a lot of false positive bugs out there. So we again have to spend so much time. So we hired a security tester, who was basically using Acunetix in his previous company for almost three years, and then you said that in that scanning is very slow. The scanning is also slow. Like, sometimes the site scan takes eight hours, six to eight hours. Yeah. And whereas in Acunetix, it took three to four hours. And plus, there are no false positives. I'm not saying none but there's very little. But here, the rate sometimes is very high. These are the two features I think we would like to improve further.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its main value and what we liked the most is its powerful AI."

"It is a highly scalable solution with a quick turnaround time for deployment and running of the software across any IT system."

"The tool helps us to block IPs and applications."

"Its ability to adapt to our applications and ensure our security policies are followed is a big plus."

"Since we've had CloudGuard, we've never had these issues happen again."

"The communication between the on-premises device and the cloud for analysis and feedback is a valuable feature."

"I rate it ten out of ten."

"The solution's strongest point is that you can connect everything to it, giving you a full view of what's connected."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pros

"The most valuable feature of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional is the advanced features, user-friendly interface, and integration with other tools."

"The extension that it provides with the community version for the skills mapping is excellent."

"The reporting part is the most valuable. It also has very good features. We use almost all of the features for different kinds of customers and needs."

"The most valuable features of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional are its ease of use and its cost efficiency."

"The way they do the research and they keep their profile up to date is great. They identify vulnerabilities and update them immediately."

"The solution has a limited range of functions, which is good for small companies. This is because, in small companies, websites are less complex. They also have single services which makes the solution good enough for them. However, the most advantageous aspect of the solution is its affordable price."

"I have found this solution has more plugins than other competitors which is a benefit. You are able to attach different plugins to the security scan to add features. For example, you can check to see if there are any payment systems that exist on a server, or username and password brute force analysis."

"One useful function is the ability to send requests to the repeater without making actual requests through the browser, allowing me to modify requests easily."

More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional pros

Cons

"They might be able to add more integrations."

"If the price could come down, I would be very happy with the product."

"I advise proactive threat detection intelligence offline, which can also help monitor and ensure system checks and compliances are in place."

"The learning curve was a challenge due to initially incorrect configurations. It took approximately a month and a half to understand how the solution works because of inadequate documentation."

"I would like it to be able to analyze more complex functions, although I did not examine the case study of more complex implementations. Things like forum fields, etc seem to need a little more focused protection of the fields scheme validation."

"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security needs to improve updates on integrations. It also needs to incorporate real-time monitoring features."

"They need improved latency in the main window."

"Improving the process for handling licensing renewals would be a welcome enhancement."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF cons

"There should be a heads up display like the one available in OWASP Zap."

"One area that can be improved, when compared to alternative tools, is that they could provide different reporting options and in different formats like PDF or something like that."

"The solution lacks sufficient stability."

"The number of false positives need to be reduced on the solution."

"I am from Brazil. The currency exchange rate from a dollar to a Brazilian Real is quite steep. It is almost six to one. It would be good if it can be sold in the local currency, and its price is cheaper for us."

"The biggest drawback is reporting. It's not so good. I can download them, but they're not so informative."

"The initial setup is a bit complex."

"The one feature that I would like to see in Burp is active scanning of REST based web services. A lot of organizations are providing APIs to access their services to support different business models like SaaS. Scanning these APIs is still a challenge for many security product companies."

More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."

"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."

"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."

"The pricing is not that expensive considering what it offers."

"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"

"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."

"I find the pricing to be reasonable."

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing and cost advice

"I rate the pricing a four out of ten."

"Burp Suite is affordable."

"We have one license. The price is very nominal."

"We pay a yearly licensing fee for the solution, which is neither cheap nor expensive."

"For a country such as Sri Lanka, the pricing is not reasonable."

"The yearly cost is about $300."

"Licensing costs are about $450/year for one use. For larger organizations, they're able to test against multiple applications while simultaneously others might have multiple versions of applications which needs to be tested which is why we have the enterprise edition."

"It is expensive for us in Brazil because the currency exchange rate from a dollar to a Brazilian Real is quite steep."

More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

847,959 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

16%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Government

12%

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?

I am less knowledgeable with prices because I only define the requirements and look at the execution. I know that its price is relatively expensive compared to other products but it gives benefits ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?

I would like it to be able to analyze more complex functions, although I did not examine the case study of more complex implementations. Things like forum fields, etc seem to need a little more foc...

See all answers

Is OWASP Zap better than PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro?

OWASP Zap and PortSwigger Burp Suite Pro have many similar features. OWASP Zap has web application scanning available with basic security vulnerabilities while Burp Suite Pro has it available with ...

See all answers

What do you like most about PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?

The solution helped us discover vulnerabilities in our applications.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional?

I find the price of PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional to be very cost-efficient.

See all answers

Comparisons

Imperva Web Application Firewall vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 19% of the time

F5 Advanced WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 15% of the time

AWS WAF vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 14% of the time

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 12% of the time

open-appsec vs Check Point CloudGuard WAF

Compared 10% of the time

More Check Point CloudGuard WAF Competitors

Acunetix vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

Compared 20% of the time

Fortify WebInspect vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

Compared 15% of the time

OWASP Zap vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

Compared 10% of the time

SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

Compared 8% of the time

HCL AppScan vs PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

Compared 6% of the time

More PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF

April 2025

Download Check Point CloudGuard WAF product report

Buyer's Guide

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

March 2025

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional report

Download PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional product report

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec

Burp

Overview

Check Point CloudGuard WAF (Web Application Firewall) is a cloud-native security solution designed to protect web applications and APIs from known and unknown threats. It employs contextual AI and machine learning to prevent zero-day attacks without relying on traditional signature-based detection methods, ensuring that applications remain secure even as new threats emerge.

CloudGuard WAF offers preemptive protection against vulnerabilities by using machine learning to identify and block zero-day threats like Log4Shell and Spring4Shell. It provides precise detection capabilities, minimizing the need for constant fine-tuning and reducing false positives. Designed for cloud-native environments, CloudGuard WAF integrates seamlessly with CI/CD pipelines, supporting automated deployment and configuration through infrastructure as code (IaC) or APIs.

Key Features of CloudGuard WAF:

ML-Based Threat Prevention: Stops application-layer attacks, including those listed in the OWASP Top 10, with minimal tuning and no reliance on signature updates.
API Discovery and Security: Identifies and secures APIs, preventing misuse and enforcing API schemas to protect against unauthorized access.
Bot and DDoS Prevention: Detects and mitigates automated attacks that can disrupt services or degrade customer experiences.
Intrusion Prevention (IPS): Provides protection against over 2,800 web-related CVEs using Check Point’s award-winning IPS technology.

Benefits of CloudGuard WAF:

Zero-Day Protection: Mitigates risks from newly discovered vulnerabilities without waiting for signature updates.
Reduced Operational Overhead: Eliminates the need for constant manual tuning and exception handling, simplifying security management.
Comprehensive API Security: Enhances control over your attack surface by discovering and securing all APIs, including shadow, rogue, and deprecated endpoints.
Fast and Easy Deployment: Deployable within minutes via WAF as a Service (WAFaaS), requiring only a one-time DNS configuration for immediate protection.

CloudGuard WAF is particularly suitable for organizations using modern, cloud-based architectures that require robust, automated security measures for both applications and APIs. Its capabilities are valuable for industries that handle sensitive data, such as finance or healthcare, where compliance and data protection are critical. Pricing and support are typically customized to the specific needs and scale of the deployment, with options for continuous updates and maintenance through Check Point's managed services.

CloudGuard WAF by Check Point provides advanced, AI-driven protection for web applications and APIs, offering automated, precise threat prevention and easy integration with cloud-native environments, ensuring robust security without the need for extensive manual configuration.

Check Point Software Technologies

Burp Suite Professional, by PortSwigger, is the world’s leading toolkit for web security testing. Over 52,000 users worldwide, across all industries and organization sizes, trust Burp Suite Professional to find more vulnerabilities, faster. With expertly-engineered manual and automated tooling, you're able to test smarter - not harder.

PortSwigger is the web security company that is enabling the world to secure the web. Over 50,000 security engineers rely on our software and expertise to secure their world.

PortSwigger

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto

Google, Amazon, NASA, FedEx, P&G, Salesforce

Buyer's Guide

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

April 2025

Free Report: Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional

Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

847,959 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.