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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Veracode comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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
Users experience up to 90% ROI with Check Point CloudGuard WAF, citing improved security, cost efficiencies, and budget management.
Sentiment score
6.9
Veracode enhances application security, saves costs, and boosts ROI by automating vulnerability detection and reducing developer hours.
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.
The scanners of Veracode bring status of the weaknesses in the current infrastructure. It scans and provides reports regarding the servers, the network, and the applications running on those servers.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Check Point CloudGuard WAF support is generally praised for expertise, but uneven response times and weekend staffing issues exist.
Sentiment score
7.4
Veracode's support is knowledgeable and effective, though challenges include response delays and time zone differences outside the US.
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.
They are very responsive and quick to help with queries within our scope.
They respond very quickly since security is something critical.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.4
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is praised for its seamless scalability, flexible licensing, and strong SaaS advantages over on-premises setups.
Sentiment score
7.5
Veracode efficiently scales for various users, supporting flexible and cost-effective growth despite minor performance and licensing limitations.
If I need to scale, I open a Whatsapp group with the director and the team, and we quickly proceed to do so.
Cloud solutions are easier to scale than on-premise solutions.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
CloudGuard WAF is highly rated for reliability and performance, with occasional minor issues reported but generally stable.
Sentiment score
8.0
Veracode is stable with minimal downtime, quick issue resolution, reliable performance, occasional false positives, and high user ratings.
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 users desire cost-effectiveness, better integration, improved support, documentation, and enhancements in threat detection and usability.
Users seek improved Veracode integration, speed, reporting, language support, API, UI, cost-effectiveness, and enhanced technical support.
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.
If it could be integrated directly with code repositories such as Bitbucket or GitHub, without the need to create a pipeline to upload and decode code, it would simplify the code scan process significantly.
Veracode can improve the licensing model as it is a bit confusing.
Maybe the boards could be made easier to understand or easier to customize.
 

Setup Cost

Check Point CloudGuard WAF is seen as good value for large enterprises despite some comparisons to cheaper alternatives.
Veracode offers comprehensive security with flexible licensing, but high pricing may deter smaller businesses despite its extensive features.
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.
It's not the most expensive solution.
If there's a security gap, you'll never know the cost or effect.
The pricing and model align with the needs of the developer community and the cybersecurity office.
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers easy deployment, AI threat detection, minimal false positives, cloud integration, and advanced security features.
Veracode enhances security by identifying vulnerabilities, integrating with CI/CD, and supporting compliance with automated and scalable solutions.
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.
It offers confidence by preventing exposure to vulnerabilities and helps ensure that we are not deploying vulnerable code into production.
The best features in Veracode include static analysis and the early detection of vulnerable libraries; it integrates with tools such as Jenkins.
The flexibility to define rules and the ability to update those rules on the fly are valuable features.
 

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) (14th)
Veracode
Ranking in Application Security Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
196
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Container Security (5th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (2nd), Penetration Testing Services (4th), Static Code Analysis (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (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 Veracode is 9.7%, down from 11.0% 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.
AkashKhurana - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to configure, stable, and good vulnerability detection
Veracode's ability to prevent vulnerable code from being deployed into production is crucial. Typically, if a dependency we use has security issues or concerns, Veracode suggests upgrading to a more secure version. For example, if we're using a PayPal dependency with version 1.3 and it has a security bug, Veracode suggests upgrading to version 1.4 which fixes the issue. We usually make our project compatible with version 1.4, but sometimes Veracode recommends removing the dependent code altogether and adding the updated dependency from another repository. Veracode provides suggestions for resolving security issues and we implement them in our code after resolving any conflicts. We run the Veracode scan again and if it fails, we do not deploy the code to production. This is critical as it ensures that security issues such as bugs and fixes are addressed. Veracode consistently assists us in identifying security issues in third-party dependencies, while also ensuring the maintenance of code quality. Preventing security bugs and threats in our code improves the overall code quality of our company, which is essential given the significant concerns surrounding security today. Veracode's policy reporting is helpful for ensuring compliance with industry standards and regulations. Veracode's solution plays a major role in achieving compliance, including HIPAA compliance. Without Veracode scans, identifying security threats and third-party dependencies would be a tedious task for DevOps professionals. Veracode provides visibility into the status of our application during every phase of development, including continuous integration and continuous development CI/CD pipeline stages. This includes builds, package creation for deployment, and various enrollment stages such as develop, queue, stage, above, and production enrollment. Prior to each stage, a Veracode scan is run. This can be accessed through Jenkins or the CI/CD pipeline by clicking on the Veracode scan option, which provides a detailed report highlighting any security issues and concerns. Veracode performs statistical analysis, dynamic analysis, software composition analysis, and manual penetration tests throughout our software development life cycle. Veracode scans not only for third-party security issues but also for possible issues in our own code. This occurs in every phase of development, including the SDLC. For example, if we use an encryption algorithm with a private or public key that is easy to decode, Veracode will identify this as an error or warning in the report and suggest using multiple layers of encryption for the keys. The entire CI/CD process is part of DevOps. Therefore, the responsibility of configuring the Veracode tool usually falls on the DevOps professional. It is essential to integrate Veracode with the CI/CD pipeline within the project to ensure it is always incorporated. Whenever there is a priority or mandatory check required before deployment, Veracode should run beforehand. This integration is carried out by our DevSecOps team. Veracode's false positive rate is good, as it helps us identify possible security concerns in our code. In my opinion, it is advisable to run a Veracode scan on all codes. I have worked in the IT industry for five years, and I have observed that Veracode has been implemented in every project I have worked on. If a tool is improving our code quality and providing us with insights into potential security issues, it is always beneficial to use it. The false positive rate boosts our developers' confidence in Veracode when addressing vulnerabilities. Veracode also provides suggestions when there is a security issue with a dependency in version 1.7, prompting us to consider using version 1.8, which does not have security issues. This process involves the developers, and it leaves a positive impression on our managers and clients, demonstrating our commitment to security. We can show them that we were previously using version 1.7 but updated to version 1.8 after identifying the security issue with Veracode's help. Unfortunately, there is no centralized platform to check for network issues or problems with dependencies and versions. Veracode provides a centralized solution where we can scan our project and receive results. Veracode has helped our organization address flaws in our software and automation processes. Its positive impact has been reflected in our ROI, which increased when we started using Veracode. Without Veracode, we would be susceptible to security issues and potential hacking. However, after implementing Veracode scans, we have not encountered any such problems. It is critical for us to use Veracode because we capture sensitive data such as pharmacy information for real-time users, including patient prescriptions and refill schedules. This sensitive data could pose a significant problem if our code or software has security vulnerabilities. Fortunately, Veracode scans allow us to prevent such issues. Veracode has helped our developers save time by providing a solution that eliminates the need to manually check for dependencies or search the internet for information on which dependencies have issues. Instead, Veracode provides a detailed report that identifies the issues and recommends the appropriate version to use. Using Veracode ensures the quality of our code and also saves time for our developers. In my career of five years, Veracode has helped me resolve code issues eight times. Veracode has reduced our SecOps costs by identifying security vulnerabilities in our code. Without Veracode, if we were to go live with these issues, it could result in a breach of our encrypted data, potentially causing significant harm to our organization. This would require significant time and cost to resolve the issue and restore the data. Veracode has improved the quality of our code and reduced the risk of such incidents occurring, thereby minimizing their impact on our organization.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 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
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

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 ...
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...
What do you like most about Veracode?
The SAST and DAST modules are great.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode?
The product’s price is a bit higher compared to other solutions. However, the tool provides good vulnerability and database features. It is worth the money.
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.