We compared Trend Micro Deep Security and Check Point CloudGuard Network Security based on our users' reviews in six categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below:
Comparison Results: Trend Micro Deep Security's initial setup can vary in difficulty, while Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is generally described as straightforward. In terms of features, Trend Micro Deep Security offers comprehensive security solutions for data centers, including virtual patching and advanced options for endpoint security. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security provides valuable features like VPN, IPS, URL filtering, and centralized management. Price-wise, Trend Micro Deep Security is considered costly, as is Check Point CloudGuard Network Security, although it is seen as competitive. Both products have received mixed reviews for their customer support.
"This solution brings us closer to having a better security score, which helps us a lot in complying with information regulations based on security."
"The product gives analytic reports."
"All the features that we subscribe to from CloudGuard NGTP are valuable. All the threat prevention and access control features give us the network security that we expect."
"We are using gateways, and I appreciate the high-availability gateways they have. They stand out more than the competitors."
"The main benefit of the Check Point Virtual Systems solution is its ability to split up the hardware appliances that we have into several logical, virtual devices with separate traffic handling policies, as well as the switching and routing."
"Its blades and VSLS (Virtual System Load Sharing) work fine."
"The ease of administration with the cloud management extension and the cloud licensing model is valuable."
"When browsing, it scans sites to ensure that they are safe and that no harm can be caused."
"I like the anti-malware features."
"It has improved functions by bringing us complete security on our clients' virtual environment."
"Aside from the basic antivirus features, there are additional features such as vulnerability protection, firewall, etc. which are helpful."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the virtual path function, which is the reason we chose to implement it."
"It serves its purpose and works well."
"It integrates well with the cloud; for example, AWS, and Google Cloud Provider."
"The initial setup was straightforward and we didn't have any problem with it."
"The integration and configuration of this product in our AWS environment was good. We haven't had any problems at all."
"Improvements needed include better integration with Azure features to match on-premises capabilities."
"The convergence time between cluster members is still not perfect. It's far away from what we get in traditional appliances. If a company wants to move mission-critical applications for an environment to the cloud, it somehow has to accept that it could have downtime of up to 40 seconds, until cluster members switch virtual IP addresses between themselves and start accepting the traffic. That is a little bit too high in my opinion. It's not fully Check Point's fault, because it's a hybrid mechanism with AWS. The blame is 50/50."
"In the next release, including VRF support would be highly beneficial."
"We utilize logging systems, and geolocation is crucial for us as some applications must only be accessible from our country. However, there have been occasional issues with this feature."
"The connection to the on-premises management requires using the CLI. It's not just a click, and you cannot edit in the management to prepare everything. You need to do it online and in real time. After that, you must execute a script, and then you should be happy that it appears in the management."
"CloudGuard functions just like any other firewall. It functions very well. The only thing that could maybe be improved would be to integrate some tools that are not integrated with the SmartConsole, like the SmartView Monitor that we need to open on a different application to access."
"The memory and hard disk capability could be strengthened."
"The business and product development team should introduce a high-end feedback collection mechanism and analyze the customer requirements constructively."
"The workloads must be better."
"Enhancements in agent performance are needed, specifically in reducing server utilization during scanning."
"The setup is fairly complex. The deployment took around two months."
"The updates for legacy systems are not rolled out frequently."
"The price could be reduced."
"We'd like to see extended capacity in the on-premises versions."
"In the solution, servers often go offline for various reasons, requiring us to manually check the cause or issue, such as connectivity issues, and to find out why the agent went offline."
"I think more work could be done on Deep Security's ability to handle dynamic threat scenarios."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 5th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 119 reviews while Trend Micro Deep Security is ranked 6th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 80 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Trend Micro Deep Security is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "The solution has good threat emulation, threat extraction, and reporting features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro Deep Security writes "Offers excellent endpoint protection and great stability ". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Secure Firewall and Netgate pfSense, whereas Trend Micro Deep Security is most compared with Trend Micro Apex One, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Symantec Endpoint Security and VMware Carbon Black Endpoint. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Trend Micro Deep Security report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors.
We monitor all Cloud and Data Center Security 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.
