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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.6
Organizations achieve 40%-90% ROIs with Check Point CloudGuard WAF, citing cost reductions, efficiency, security, and consolidated tools.
Sentiment score
7.2
SonarQube Server boosts code quality and security, aiding teams in flaw detection and integration with tools like Jenkins.
When we are attacked, we can understand how important the solution is.
When you migrate to the cloud, it feels like saving 90% of your time.
Most of the operations happen in the background, so I do not spend much time on it.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Check Point CloudGuard WAF receives mixed reviews for customer service, praised for dedication but criticized for response delays.
Sentiment score
6.1
SonarQube's support receives mixed reviews; the active community and detailed documentation are crucial, especially for free users.
They need to increase the number of people for 24/7 support.
They were responsive even before we committed to buying their solution.
I also received full technical support, especially during the implementation.
The community support is quite effective.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.4
Check Point CloudGuard WAF excels in scalability and adaptability, ensuring efficient performance and easy management across environments and applications.
Sentiment score
7.0
SonarQube Server effectively supports scalability but may require more resources and careful setup for larger projects.
If I need to scale, I open a Whatsapp group with the director and the team, and we quickly proceed to do so.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers excellent stability and reliability, with quick resolutions for minor configuration and licensing issues.
Sentiment score
7.7
SonarQube Server is stable and reliable, with minor issues, enhanced in newer versions, and requires accurate configuration.
It is very stable.
It is very stable, never crashing or giving me an error that I can see.
I did not have any issues in the last three years during which I had more than ten critical services running on CloudGuard.
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point CloudGuard WAF needs cost reduction, improved support, better integration, and usability enhancements to address latency and competition.
Users seek faster analysis, improved language support, better integration, enhanced security features, and refined usability and documentation.
The provider could improve by providing better guidance and support during the configuration process.
It's not something you manipulate, it's not an antivirus where you deal with signatures, updates, and upgrades every day.
I would say that the more automation this product has, the easier it will be to work with it.
 

Setup Cost

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers good value with competitive pricing, robust features, and flexible licensing for advanced security needs.
SonarQube Server offers free and paid editions, with scalable pricing for advanced features and enterprise-grade support.
It is more expensive than f5, where we purchased everything as bundles, and Check Point costs more, but it is worth the money.
I know that its price is relatively expensive compared to other products but it gives benefits that are worth it.
It is a really good price considering the functionalities of the product and the price of the license.
The freemium version of SonarQube Server offers excellent value, especially compared to the high costs of Snyk.
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers scalable deployment, advanced security, and economic benefits, enhancing usability and reducing Total Cost of Ownership.
SonarQube Server excels with multi-language support, CI integration, security checks, and an open-source model with strong community backing.
Upon implementation and evaluation with third-party penetration testing, it meets rigorous security standards required for dealing with financial institutions.
It can protect against zero-day attacks and hidden anomalies.
The solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies effectively.
Some of the static code analysis capabilities are the most beneficial.
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Application Security Tools
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (12th)
SonarQube Server (formerly ...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (1st), Software Development Analytics (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 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 SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) is 25.5%, down from 27.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Dialungana Malungo - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Wang Dayong - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages
The product provides false reports sometimes. It also fails to understand the context of the code. It reports that a line of code has issues without considering its relation with the previous line. The product should improve the report quality. While it asks us to improve the code quality, it would be good if it also suggests how to improve the quality.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
6%
 

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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
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. Rega...
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
We are satisfied with the product because it does what we need it to do, but one thing that I would like to see improved in the product is the protection of our mobile applications. When I migrate ...
Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?
I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which tools that are the best for for Static Code Analysis, I suggest you have a look...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...
How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?
We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.