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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs F5 Advanced WAF comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 1, 2025

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
6.4
Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers increased security, over 70% ROI, reduced costs, improved efficiency, and decreased server management needs.
Sentiment score
7.6
F5 Advanced WAF boosts ROI by enhancing security, reducing overhead, and protecting assets in sectors like finance and banking.
When we are attacked, we can understand how important the solution is.
Cyber security manager at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
When you migrate to the cloud, it feels like saving 90% of your time.
Manager, Managed Security Services at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
Most of the operations happen in the background, so I do not spend much time on it.
Principal Cybersecurity Specialist at Unitel S.A.
Time savings in daily operations come from the automatic learning and signature update reducing the need for constant manual rule management, allowing the security and network teams to spend significantly less time handling false positive application-related escalations.
Cyber Security Consultant at ProTechmanize
Subscription models offer clearer ROI due to a more competitive pricing scheme.
Global Channel Alliances Lead at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
The amount of attacks it protects against is immense, more than F5 Advanced WAF itself costs.
Security Solutions Architect at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.4
Check Point CloudGuard WAF receives mixed customer support feedback, with praise for dedication and criticism for response delays.
Sentiment score
6.9
F5 Advanced WAF's support is professional and helpful, though response times vary based on service level and issue priority.
They need to increase the number of people for 24/7 support.
Principal Cybersecurity Specialist at Unitel S.A.
They were responsive even before we committed to buying their solution.
Infrastructure Manager at FPMH
I also received full technical support, especially during the implementation.
Cyber security manager at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
Both response time and availability need to be improved.
Project Manager at IBM
F5 Advanced WAF provides the insights and notifications I need in terms of reporting and alerting.
cybersecurity Team Leader at EMAK
If there is a bug, the support is usually understanding and resolves issues.
CEO at CyberApp
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Check Point CloudGuard WAF delivers outstanding scalability and support, adeptly managing increased traffic and multi-cloud environments.
Sentiment score
7.5
F5 Advanced WAF is adaptable, scalable, and supports diverse business needs with robust load balancing and cloud capabilities.
If I need to scale, I open a Whatsapp group with the director and the team, and we quickly proceed to do so.
Cyber security manager at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
They have sufficient resources, and there are no challenges from a scalability perspective.
Project Manager at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Check Point CloudGuard WAF's scalability is very good.
Sr. VP of Creative & Development at a non-tech company with 51-200 employees
I can run it in HA mode or even divide the traffic volume to the number of instances that I have based on their resource sizing.
Security Solutions Architect at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is praised for its reliability, high uptime, and stability, despite minor configuration concerns.
Sentiment score
8.4
F5 Advanced WAF is praised for its stability and reliability, handling substantial workloads effectively with minimal bugs.
It is very stable.
Team Leader, Cloudops & Cloud Architect at a consultancy with 501-1,000 employees
It is very stable, never crashing or giving me an error that I can see.
Sysadmin at a government with 501-1,000 employees
I did not have any issues in the last three years during which I had more than ten critical services running on CloudGuard.
Information Technology - Infrastructure and Security at Cyprus Development Bank
F5 Advanced WAF has been very reliable and consistent for us; in our on-premise enterprise setup, it has been stable and predictable in day-to-day operations without any unexpected crashes or WAF-related downtime in production.
Cyber Security Consultant at ProTechmanize
F5 Advanced WAF is pretty stable.
Security Solutions Architect at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point CloudGuard WAF needs cost reduction, better integration, improved support, and enhanced usability, including menu and threat monitoring.
F5 Advanced WAF needs a user-friendly interface, better integration, competitive pricing, and improved automation, scalability, and documentation.
The provider could improve by providing better guidance and support during the configuration process.
Infrastructure Manager at FPMH
Future releases should include better bot mitigation, behavioral anomaly detection, compliance templates, advanced threat intel integration, and streamlined multi-cloud support to boost protection and usability.
Senior Cyber Security Engineer at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
A machine learning-based adaptive mode could help the WAF learn over time and auto-tune policies.
Technical Support Executive at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Deployment training for F5 Advanced WAF is lacking and restricts growth by being inaccessible and costly for partners.
Global Channel Alliances Lead at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Overall, these are not blockers, merely enhancement opportunities, and once tuned, F5 Advanced WAF is very stable and reliable; improving usability, reporting, and onboarding would make it even more effective for larger environments.
Cyber Security Consultant at ProTechmanize
There is excellent clarity in the LTM and the WAF.
Project Manager at IBM
 

Setup Cost

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers competitive pricing with advanced features and flexible licensing, delivering cost-effective security performance.
F5 Advanced WAF's high cost is justified by its robust features, appealing to enterprises needing comprehensive protection.
It is more expensive than f5, where we purchased everything as bundles, and Check Point costs more, but it is worth the money.
Cyber security manager at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
It is less costly than Cloudflare, Fortinet, and other vendors.
Project Manager at a outsourcing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
I know that its price is relatively expensive compared to other products but it gives benefits that are worth it.
Ciso at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
Licensing is capacity-driven, so you need careful planning based on traffic volume and use cases, and adding features such as Bot Protection impacts costs; once licensing is clear and sized correctly, there are no surprises.
Cyber Security Consultant at ProTechmanize
Subscription models have competitive pricing, while perpetual licenses involve an upfront higher cost.
Global Channel Alliances Lead at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
The price is affordable and satisfactory.
CEO at CyberApp
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides scalable, automated security with AI analysis, real-time monitoring, and a user-friendly dashboard.
F5 Advanced WAF excels in detection, customization, and reporting, providing comprehensive web application security and user-friendly operation.
Upon implementation and evaluation with third-party penetration testing, it meets rigorous security standards required for dealing with financial institutions.
Infrastructure Manager at FPMH
It can protect against zero-day attacks and hidden anomalies.
Amministratore Della Sicurezza Di Rete at a government with 1,001-5,000 employees
The solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies effectively.
Information Technology - Infrastructure and Security at Cyprus Development Bank
The Advanced Attack Signature database is very strong and regularly updated, effectively blocking SQL injections, cross-site scripting, command injections, and file inclusion attacks while allowing selective enabling or disabling of signatures to avoid blocking genuine traffic.
Cyber Security Consultant at ProTechmanize
F5 Advanced WAF offers the best features that are capable of stopping any type of attack, and it is a really reliable and stable product that you can rely on to stop any type of attack.
cybersecurity Team Leader at EMAK
The perpetual license, despite an initial higher cost, lacks transparency regarding support expiration.
Global Channel Alliances Lead at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
53
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (5th)
F5 Advanced WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
73
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 2.6%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 Advanced WAF is 7.5%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
F5 Advanced WAF7.5%
Check Point CloudGuard WAF2.6%
Other89.9%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2751468 - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant Manager at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Robust threat protection improves security and operational efficiency
Areas where Check Point CloudGuard WAF can improve include simple policy tuning, as the protection seems strong, though initial rule tuning can be complex. More guided workflows or templates would help speed up deployment, along with deeper integration with the DevOps pipeline, and while it handles API well, more dedicated API security would add value. In addition, it could be improved with better integration with the DevOps pipeline, more granular reporting, as the dashboards provide good high-level visibility, but sometimes digging into specific attack patterns or trends requires manual effort, and simple tuning of the ML models would be beneficial.
Kallamuddin Ansari - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Consultant at ProTechmanize
Application security has protected critical banking services while policy learning minimizes false blocks
F5 Advanced WAF performs well overall, but I have noticed some points that could enhance the solution. Initially, policy tuning could be simpler, as while the learning engine is powerful, initial tuning still requires experienced engineers, which can be challenging for new teams due to the complexity of options and parameters. A more guided and simple tuning workflow would help reduce the learning curve. Additionally, tighter native integration with SIEM or SOAR tools would simplify correlation and investigations for security teams, although log exports are available. Overall, these are not blockers, merely enhancement opportunities, and once tuned, F5 Advanced WAF is very stable and reliable; improving usability, reporting, and onboarding would make it even more effective for larger environments.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise20
Large Enterprise17
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise31
 

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?
The setup cost was taken with the head of the department, who handled the pricing and everything.
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
Currently, there is nothing in the areas of Check Point CloudGuard WAF that I would like to see improved or enhanced in the future. If there is anything in the roadmap, I would definitely like to t...
What do you like most about F5 Advanced WAF?
It's a fairly easy-to-use and user-friendly tool. My administrators and team also like its ability to customize the rules per the requirements.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 Advanced WAF?
Regarding the price, I think the cost is a bit higher compared to others. Earlier we were using Radware, and compared to Radware, it is very high. However, it is providing more features than Radwar...
What needs improvement with F5 Advanced WAF?
In terms of additional features I would like to see from them in the future, I think the GTM is a bit complicated to configure, which I observed. Otherwise, LTM and WAF are straightforward. I faced...
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. F5 Advanced WAF and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.