We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard WAF and Checkmarx One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution's strongest point is that you can connect everything to it, giving you a full view of what's connected."
"The most effective CloudGuard feature for threat prevention is its web app protection."
"The features I have found most valuable are the comprehensive threat prevention capabilities, automated policy management, and seamless integration with cloud environments."
"The tool's most valuable feature is AI, which makes operations easier. Moreover, it is easy to deploy."
"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."
"I find the configuration and real-time monitoring features valuable."
"It offers good functionality of the application that is currently running."
"Compared to the solutions we used previously, Checkmarx has reduced our workload by almost 75%."
"The SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."
"The features and technologies are very good. The flexibility and the roadmap have also been very good. They're at the forefront of delivering the additional capabilities that are required with cloud delivery, etc. Their ability to deliver what customers require and when they require is very important."
"Vulnerability details is valuable."
"Helps us check vulnerabilities in our SAP Fiori application."
"Most valuable features include: ease of use, dashboard. interface and the ability to report."
"The main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use. It's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"Less false positive errors as compared to any other solution."
"The creation of security profiles for each application takes a lot of time."
"I have encountered issues with Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's technical support. It also has missing configuration features."
"A feature we'd like to see in the future is something that could protect against other attack vectors, with a focus on application protection."
"The trial version should be extended further so that QA test engineers can actually test the utilities in a real sense and can provide the maximum amount of feedback for enhancements."
"I would like to be able to integrate the theme of Artificial Intelligence to help review issues and to monitor and view the security issue while also suggesting and interpreting and additionally configuring solutions - basically, acting as an interpreter."
"CloudGuard for Application Security, like the other Check Point applications, has been presenting major latency problems when entering their administrative portal."
"We would like the solution to be more economical since it is not accessible to all clients."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security needs to improve updates on integrations. It also needs to incorporate real-time monitoring features."
"We want to have a holistic view of the portfolio-level dashboard and not just an individual technical project level."
"Checkmarx reports many false positives that we need to manually segregate and mark “Not exploitable”."
"In terms of dashboarding, the solution could provide a little more flexibility in terms of creating more dashboards. It has some of its own dashboards that come out of the box. However, if I have to implement my own dashboards that are aligned to my organization's requirements, that dashboarding feature has limited capability right now."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"Some of the descriptions were found to be missing or were not as elaborate as compared to other descriptions. Although, they could be found across various standard sources but it would save a lot of time for developers, if this was fixed."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it seems outdated."
"We can run only one project at a time."
"Checkmarx needs to be more scalable for large enterprise companies."
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is ranked 12th in Application Security Tools with 28 reviews while Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard WAF is rated 8.8, while Checkmarx One is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard WAF writes "Automation capabilities also help streamline security processes and smooths down API integration processes and detects API availability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". Check Point CloudGuard WAF is most compared with SonarQube, whereas Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity. See our Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Checkmarx One 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.
