We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: CloudGuard has sophisticated threat detection capabilities. In contrast, Prisma Cloud received some negative feedback for its threat detection.
"The CSPM module has been the most effective. It was easy to deploy and covered all our accounts through APIs, requiring no agents. Wiz provides instant visibility into high-level risks that we need to address."
"The security baseline and vulnerability assessments is the valuable feature."
"Our most important features are those around entitlement, external exposure, vulnerabilities, and container security."
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"I like Wiz's reporting, and it's easy to do queries. For example, it's pretty simple to find out how many servers we have and the applications installed on each. I like Wiz's security graph because you can use it to see the whole organization even if you have multiple accounts."
"The vulnerability management modules and the discovery and inventory are the most valuable features. Before using Wiz, it was a very manual process for both. After implementing it, we're able to get all of the analytics into a single platform that gives us visibility across all the systems in our cloud. We're able to correspond and understand what the vulnerability landscape looks like a lot faster."
"The first thing that stood out was the ease of installation and the quick value we got out of the solution."
"The ability to drill down to individual hosts on an account and see which ones are affected is valuable."
"Auto remediation is a very effective feature that helps ensure less manual intervention."
"People implementing this solution are concerned with addressing a significant risk, and within the AWS realm, this tool does de-risk substantially."
"The posture management and remediation features are the most valuable. We use GSL Builder to build custom rules in alignment with our organization's policies. CloudGuard has canned rules using multiple standard frameworks, but we also have additional rules."
"This solution has saved the company from unnecessary data loss that occurs due to cyber attacks."
"The initial setup is easy and not complex at all."
"The solution has intelligence that integrates with a range of threat intelligence feeds, including Check Point's ThreatCloud, to provide real-time intelligence on emerging threats."
"Checkpoint posture management gives you visibility across your entire cloud infrastructure, so it helps you with management, maintenance, and compliance. With visibility across all these cloud platforms, you can protect against compromised credentials or identity theft."
"The most valuable features are vulnerability monitoring, serverless access, container runtime features, and Defender."
"Integration is very easy. And because it supports security that spans multi- and hybrid-cloud environments, it's very easy to use."
"The support is excellent."
"You can also integrate with Amazon Managed Services. You can also get a snapshot in time, whether that's over a 24-hour period, seven days, or a month, to determine what the estate might look like at a certain point in time and generate reports from that for vulnerability management forums."
"Its ease of integration is valuable because we need to get the solution out of the door quickly, so speed and ease matter."
"Palo Alto enables us to know what security threats are happening in the background."
"The most valuable feature is its cloud security posture management."
"Configuration monitoring and alerting is the most valuable feature; it happens at the cloud's speed, allowing our development team to respond quickly. If a configuration goes against our security best practices, we're alerted promptly and can act to resolve the issue. As cloud security staff, we're not staring at the cloud all the time, and we want to let the developers do their jobs so that our company is protected and work is proceeding within our security controls."
"The solution's container security could be improved."
"We're looking at some of the data compliance stuff that they've got Jon offer. I know they're looking at container security, which we gonna be looking at next."
"We would like to see improvements to executive-level reporting and data reporting in general, which we understand is being rolled out to the platform."
"The remediation workflow within the Wiz could be improved."
"Wiz's reporting capabilities could be refined a bit. They are making headway on that, but more executive-style dashboards would be nice. They just implemented a community aspect where you can share documents and feedback. This was something users had been requesting for a while. They are listening to customer feedback and making changes."
"The reporting isn't that great. They have executive summaries, but it's only a compliance report that maps all current issues to specific controls. Whether you look at one subscription or project, regardless of the size, you will get a multipage report on how the issues in that account map to that control. Our CSO isn't going to read through that. He won't filter that out or show that to his leadership and say, "Here's what we're doing." It isn't a helpful report. They're working on it, but it's a poor executive summary."
"We wish there were a way, beyond providing visibility and automated remediation, to wait on a given remediation, due to a critical aspect, such as the cost associated with a particular upgrade... We would like to see preventive controls that can be applied through Wiz to protect against vulnerabilities that we're not going to be able to remediate immediately."
"The only thing that needs to be improved is the number of scans per day."
"The performance can be better. Sometimes, the performance is not up to the mark. There is also integration complexity with third-party software and tools."
"I would like to see tighter integration with other compliance tools, like Chef Compliance, in addition to Inspector."
"I would like to see some AI on the back-end, just to assist with doing analysis and making recommendations."
"Check Point must provide a multi-cloud facility where AWS, Azure, and GCP can seamlessly work together and display posture in an integrated manner."
"It does not support on-premise deployments such as VMware Tanzu, and this has been a major drawback when it comes to integrations with some applications."
"I would like them to include support for their products in languages other than English."
"Currently, this solution is somewhat expensive."
"The license cost is expensive and has room for improvement."
"The integration of the Compute function into the cloud monitoring function—because those are two different tools that are being combined together—could use some more work. It still feels a little bit disjointed."
"There are hundreds of built-in policies for AWS and Azure, but GCP and Oracle are not covered as much as AWS. There is a lot of work to do on that part. There is, obviously, a tiny bit of favoritism towards AWS because it has the most market share."
"One thing that is missing is Cloud Run runtime security—serverless. That would be great to have in the tool. It's not that easy to have Cloud Run in specific environments."
"This solution is more AWS and Azure-centric. It needs to be more specific on the GCP side, which they are working on."
"When it comes to protecting the full cloud-native stack, it has the right breadth. They're covering all the topics I would care about, like container, cloud configuration, and serverless. There's one gap. There could be a better set of features around identity management—native AWS—IAM roles, and service account management. The depth in each of those areas varies a little bit. While they may have the breadth, I think there's still work to do in flushing out each of those feature sets."
"In terms of improvement, there are some small things like hardening and making sure the Linux resources are deployed well but that's more at an operational level."
"One definite area for improvement is the auto-remediation or the CWP area. The second one is the RQL language. It is still not very flexible and does not cover a lot of use cases. The RQL language could be dramatically improved to add more options."
"We have discovered that Prisma is not functioning properly with GCP."
More Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 4th in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 63 reviews while Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is ranked 1st in Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) with 82 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6, while Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP writes "Threat intel integration provides us visibility in case any workload is communicating with suspicious or blacklisted IPs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks writes "The dashboard is very user-friendly and can be used to generate custom RQL based on user requirements". Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Qualys VMDR, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Orca Security, whereas Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Aqua Cloud Security Platform, AWS Security Hub, CrowdStrike Falcon Cloud Security and Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes. See our Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP vs. Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks report.
See our list of best Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) vendors, best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors, and best Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) 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.