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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs NGINX App Protect 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
6.3
Investments in NGINX App Protect yield positive returns with immediate security benefits, especially during remote work transitions and CICD integration.
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.
 

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
5.9
NGINX App Protect support is generally praised for responsiveness, with occasional delays and high costs as minor concerns.
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
They were quick and efficient when we had issues.
Project Manager at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
I would rate the customer support a 9 on a scale of 1 to 10.
Tech Lead at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
 

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
6.2
NGINX App Protect's scalability is praised by some for flexibility but criticized by others for deployment and configuration challenges.
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
The scalability of NGINX App Protect is good and open source at its best.
Tech Lead at a tech vendor with 51-200 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
NGINX App Protect is praised for stability, speed, and flexibility, outperforming competitors, but noted for potential improvements.
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
It is a quality solution, and I would rate its stability as eight out of ten.
IT Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point CloudGuard WAF needs cost reduction, better integration, improved support, and enhanced usability, including menu and threat monitoring.
NGINX App Protect needs better configuration flexibility, automation, and support, with improvements in throughput, licensing, and communication from F5.
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
There was more information from F5 regarding hardware requirements and specifications to deploy the service.
IT Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
The GUI and web GUI configuration could be improved to be easier to manage and use.
Dev Ops Engineer at adesso AG
I think NGINX App Protect could be improved by having it come out of the box with NGINX.
Tech Lead at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
 

Setup Cost

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers competitive pricing with advanced features and flexible licensing, delivering cost-effective security performance.
NGINX App Protect pricing is expensive but some find it reasonable, with flexible subscription options and competitive licensing costs.
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
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides scalable, automated security with AI analysis, real-time monitoring, and a user-friendly dashboard.
NGINX App Protect provides security, flexibility, automation, and integration with DevOps, featuring WAF, traffic management, and container support.
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 most valuable feature is the ability to operate in a DevOps environment and to be configured through API and pipeline by the developers themselves.
IT Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Detecting bots and blocking IPs have proven effective for securing applications.
Project Manager at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
It is stable, affordable, and easy to manage.
Dev Ops Engineer at adesso AG
 

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)
NGINX App Protect
Ranking in Web Application Firewall (WAF)
15th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
Container Security (27th), API Security (7th)
 

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 NGINX App Protect is 2.1%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Check Point CloudGuard WAF2.6%
NGINX App Protect2.1%
Other95.3%
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.
JP
Project Manager at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Blocking IPs and detecting bots enhances security for medical websites
I was researching products like NGINX App Protect and F5 Advanced WAF for long-term options. I have some use for such a solution, but probably not before next year Detecting bots and blocking IPs have proven effective for securing applications. We were able to block groups of IP addresses that…
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%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

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 Business9
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise12
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NGINX App Protect?
I don't know the pricing yet because in my other project, I was not part of the buying side and I was just starting to look at options.
What needs improvement with NGINX App Protect?
It would be better if it were easier to implement and if there was more information from F5 regarding hardware requirements and specifications to deploy the service, to avoid disruptions after impl...
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
NGINX WAF, NGINX Web Application Firewall
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. NGINX App Protect and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.