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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs Imperva Web Application Firewall 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
11th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (9th)
Imperva Web Application Fir...
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Web Application Firewall (WAF) category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 1.8%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Imperva Web Application Firewall is 5.6%, down from 6.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
 

Featured Reviews

Dialungana Malungo - PeerSpot reviewer
Protects our web applications and APIs and has a very low false positive rate
CloudGuard WAF is a very straightforward solution. I do not have to worry about signatures. Most of the solutions that are out there are mainly based on signatures, and I have to do a lot of maintenance to get the signature updates, and sometimes, due to a lack of resources, I am not able to do so. With CloudGuard WAF, I have peace of mind, because most of the features are AI-based, and there is not much configuration that needs to be done on my side. Once set, I only go to CloudGuard WAF to check. I do not have to worry about signatures or updates. Everything is done perfectly, and I have a sense of peace because I know our applications are safe. It is very important for us that CloudGuard WAF protects our applications against threats without relying on signatures. That is definitely one of the key features I need.
Mitesh D Patel - PeerSpot reviewer
Effectively defends against threats like cross-site scripting (XSS), SQL injection, and others
It does bring value. For example, consider a BFSI customer. Their application is critical and represents their brand. Without a WAF, an attack could take their application down, harming their reputation. It leads to hampering the customer's workflow. With an Imperva WAF, they protect against attacks like DDoS or SQL injection, ensuring their application remains available and customers are happy. That's the main benefit for both the customer and the organization. The impact depends on the customer's use case. If their business primarily operates online, a CDN is beneficial for traffic optimization. Moreover, the integration options depend on the specific use case of our customers. Generally, integration capabilities are good with SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) parts.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"On the endpoint side, the most valuable feature is undoubtedly the cloud-based management capability, along with the ransomware protection, despite not encountering any instances so far."
"The solution's strongest point is that you can connect everything to it, giving you a full view of what's connected."
"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security helped reduce the cost of ownership for our web application firewall by 50%."
"With CloudGuard WAF, I have peace of mind, because most of the features are AI-based, and there is not much configuration that needs to be done on my side."
"User attitude reviews help us keep all online users compliant with company regulations and policies."
"Before CloudGuard, we periodically had some website issues. Since we've had CloudGuard, we've never had these issues happen again."
"Overall, it's a good solution, and it fulfills all our core purposes, providing complete visibility and security."
"CloudGuard WAF has been great."
"Very intuitive and granular configuration - It does not require much time, or advanced knowledge, for configuration and maintenance."
"Imperva WAF's strongest features are the detection of web application threats and vulnerabilities in the source code."
"Learning mode and custom policies are helpful features."
"The valuable features of Imperva WAF include its effective security breach prevention through automatically updating rules."
"The dynamic profiling of websites is the solution's most valuable feature. The security is also good."
"There are some features that are configured by default, so even without doing much, it can still provide a level of protection."
"The solution can be configured in just a couple of minutes."
"The solution is stable."
 

Cons

"The learning curve was a challenge due to initially incorrect configurations. It took approximately a month and a half to understand how the solution works because of inadequate documentation."
"I feel like I need more clarity in understanding pricing for DDoS protection."
"The reporting can be improved."
"The documentation of each of the tools that they offer needs to be better."
"We would like to have a solution of this type for the administration of applications from mobile devices."
"I am pretty happy with the current version. I have not yet used it to its full potential, but there could be improvements as I explore it further."
"When I migrate the traffic from our mobile application to CloudGuard, we are not getting what we expected."
"I have faced issues with the tool's blocking aspects. It is hard to open or block web services due to the multitude of cloud centers. I have to do the process manually at times. We have a bug which is hard to solve."
"The tool needs to improve CPU and storage memory."
"It should be more user-friendly. Like other web solutions, it would be helpful to be able to easily do policy configuration and identification inside the application. Understanding the in-depth configuration of a policy is somewhat difficult for an engineer, and they can improve that."
"I think that better bot protection is needed in this solution."
"I loved the approach of the cloud. The cloud has a lot of new features, like advanced web protection and DDoS protection. If those could also be on-boarded onto the on-prem versions, that would be ideal. They need to pay attention to both deployment options and not just favor one."
"The solution works for particular zones but isn't always the best solution for all zones."
"Support is one thing I wish Imperva could improve."
"Sometimes, support tickets don't get addressed quickly."
"There's always room for improvement. Occasionally, there might be false-positive alerts."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."
"I work for an Indian banking client. In India, companies are on a budget. The company liked Check Point very much, but it was a little bit costly compared to FortiWeb. However, it had more features compared to FortiWeb."
"I find the pricing to be reasonable."
"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"The sales team or account managers from Check Point are top-notch. As I am using other products as well, my pricing was competitive compared to others."
"If the pricing for the Infinity platform covers everything, it would be more straightforward. I had a hard time selling it to our CEO as a former CFO because of the differentials. There are different deltas year to year over a five-year period. It is very difficult to explain. It would be easier to digest for our executives if there was a flatter scale"
"The base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall is expensive."
"Licensing can range from one to twenty thousand dollars annually. Additionally, some features, including software support, require an annual subscription as well."
"We sell three-year licenses for Imperva Web Application Firewall to our customers. The price is a little expensive."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall price is higher compared to other solutions. However, everything is included in the price."
"The solution's pricing is an issue."
"It's an excellent product, but it can be very costly."
"Imperva Web Application Firewall's pricing is expensive."
"It is very costly, but the return on investment is very high. Its cost was around $70,000, and we got it back in just six months."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Insurance Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 pricing can be a bit complex to understand initially. It can be challenging to estimate costs, especially when scaling our usage.
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
The pricing can be a bit complex to understand initially. It can be challenging to estimate costs, especially when scaling our usage. Also, while the documentation is comprehensive, it can be diffi...
Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
For ADC, any ADC can do a good job. But in case if you want to add WAF functionality to the same ADC hardware you have to look for other ADC's like F5, Imperva, Radware, Fortinet, etc.
DDoS solutions: Any other solutions to consider aside from Radware DDoS Protection Service and F5 Silverline DDoS Protection?
You can have a look to Imperva Cloud WAF, the anti-DDoS mitigation is under 1s and works very well. I observed a lot of DDoS attacks that were well managed (even not seen by the customer) by Imperv...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
BlueCross BlueShield, eHarmony, EMF Broadcasting, GE Healthcare, Metro Bank, The Motley Fool, Siemens
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. Imperva Web Application Firewall and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.