We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management and Aqua Security Platform based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides a wide range of data security measures, including incident detection and detailed reporting. It also offers IAM role control and governance support. Aqua Security Platform excels in container security and on-demand patching. Users also liked its sandboxing features. Check Point CloudGuard could enhance its false positive rate and vulnerability assessments. Aqua Security Platform could reduce its resource consumption optimization while improving its log ingestion and integration with other tools.
Service and Support: Customers have generally expressed satisfaction with Check Point customer service, noting quick response times and positive support experiences, but some users say there is room for improvement. Aqua Security Platform's customer service has also been praised for being responsive and helpful, although a few users mentioned having to resolve issues on their own. Some said Aqua should provide more local support to customers in different regions.
Ease of Deployment: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management's initial setup is straightforward and quick, while Aqua Security Platform's setup can be more complex and time-consuming, especially for larger environments.
Pricing: Some regard Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management as a budget-friendly option, but others perceive it as costly. Aqua Security Platform's licensing is moderate and not based on user count, but some say the price could be lower.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management provides a significant return on investment by effectively addressing compliance issues and minimizing administrative work. Users have not provided feedback on Aqua Security Platform's ROI so far.
Comparison Results: Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is preferred over Aqua Security Platform. Users praise Check Point for its comprehensive data protection and 360 coverage of cloud infrastructure. Check Point offers granular reporting and customizable rulesets. Aqua Security Platform users complained about the complexity of its setup processes and suggested improvements in reporting, logging, and resource consumption.
"The security baseline and vulnerability assessments is the valuable feature."
"With Wiz, we get timely alerts for leaked data or any vulnerabilities already existing in our environment."
"The automation roles are essential because we ultimately want to do less work and automate more. The dashboards are easy to read and visually pleasing. You can understand things quickly, which makes it easy for our other teams. The network and infrastructure teams don't know as much about security as we do, so it helps to have a tool that's accessible and nice to look at."
"The product supports out-of-the-box reporting with context about the asset and allows us to perform complex custom queries on UI."
"Our most important features are those around entitlement, external exposure, vulnerabilities, and container security."
"Out of all the features, the one item that has been most valuable is the fact that Wiz puts into context all the pieces that create an issue, and applies a particular risk evaluation that helps us prioritize when we need to address a misconfiguration, vulnerability, or any issue that would put our environment into risk."
"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 solution is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of Aqua Security is the scanner."
"Support is very helpful."
"Aqua Security helps us to check the vulnerability of image assurance and check for malware."
"Aqua Security allowed us to gain visibility into the vulnerabilities that were present in the container images, that were being rolled out, the amount of risk that we were introducing to the platform, and provided us a look into the container environment by introducing access control mechanisms. In addition, when it came to runtime-level policies, we could restrict container access to resources in our environment, such as network-level or other application-level access."
"The most helpful feature of Aqua Security is Drift Prevention, which is a feature that allows images to be immutable. In addition, one of the main reasons we went with Aqua Security is because it provides strong protection when it comes to runtime security."
"We use Aqua Security for the container security features."
"The DTA, which stands for Dynamic Threat Analysis, allows me to analyze Docker images in a sandbox environment before deployment, helping me anticipate risks."
"The container security element of this product has been very valuable to our organization."
"It provides critical insights that enable the IT team to plan and launch smart investigations when there are security breaches."
"It has an analytics service that does research for us."
"We like the ability to investigate, analyze, and generate reports."
"The way they offer container security is a big highlight that I have noticed. The solution is also agentless, so the scanning, runtime, really everything is offered directly by CloudGuard."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to apply common tools across all accounts."
"Gives us centralized firewall management for both Windows and Linux distros. Also provides a clear view of the security configurations and connections across environments (DMZ, external and internal networks)."
"The most valuable feature of Check Point CloudGuard Posture Management is the training."
"The two most valuable features for us are the central firewall administrator and the real-time cloud compliance monitoring."
"The solution's container security could be improved."
"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'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."
"One significant issue is that the searches are case-sensitive, so finding a misconfigured resource can become very challenging."
"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."
"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 only thing that needs to be improved is the number of scans per day."
"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."
"Sometimes I got stressed with the UI."
"There's room for improvement, particularly in management capabilities as it may not be comprehensive enough for all customers, and it has been lacking in the realm of cloud security posture management."
"They want to release improvements to their product to work with other servers because now there are more focused on the Kubernetes environment. They need to improve the normal servers. I would like to have more options."
"In the next release, Aqua Security should add the ability to automatically send reports to customers."
"Aqua Security lacks a lot in reporting."
"We would like to see an improvement in the overview visibility that this solution offers."
"It's a bit hard to use the user roles. That was a bit confusing."
"Aqua Security could provide more open documentation so that their learning resources can be more easily accessed and searched through online. Right now, a lot of the documentation is closed and not available to the public."
"The false positives can be annoying at times."
"The user interface could be improved. Sometimes, the visibility is not immediately available for the environment. We have the native servers that come with the solutions, but we cannot see them in the Check Point log. Another issue is with the integrated file monitoring. It would make sense to have stuff like file integrity monitoring and malware scanning available within this module because we don't want to integrate another product."
"Almost all features are good, however, they still require improvements to the code security portion on which integration with the major source code repository is required."
"The software configurations theory is complicated, and without proper planning and a well-skilled technical team, it cannot perform its tasks properly."
"The guidelines to implement or to link with the clouds are not complete."
"I would like to see some AI on the back-end, just to assist with doing analysis and making recommendations."
"The support it provides is not very good. They should improve it since we have had several setbacks due to support issues."
"CloudGuard could be improved by including integration with vendors other than AWS, especially Azure, especially in permissions."
Aqua Cloud Security Platform is ranked 12th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 16 reviews while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is ranked 7th in Cloud and Data Center Security with 60 reviews. Aqua Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.0, while Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Aqua Cloud Security Platform writes "A robust and cost-effective solution, excelling in scalability, on-premises support, and responsive technical support, making it well-suited for enterprises navigating stringent regulatory environment". On the other hand, 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". Aqua Cloud Security Platform is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Snyk, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, SUSE NeuVector and Sysdig Secure, whereas Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, AWS GuardDuty, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Qualys VMDR and Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks. See our Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs. Check Point CloudGuard CNAPP report.
See our list of best Cloud and Data Center Security vendors, best Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) vendors, and best Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) 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.
