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

Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 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
7.6
Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers up to 90% ROI with improved security, efficiency, and significant long-term financial benefits.
Sentiment score
7.2
SonarQube Server boosts code quality and security, aiding teams in flaw detection and integration with tools like Jenkins.
When we are attacked, we can understand how important the solution is.
When you migrate to the cloud, it feels like saving 90% of your time.
Most of the operations happen in the background, so I do not spend much time on it.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Check Point CloudGuard WAF support is praised for expertise but faces criticism for delays and limited availability during issues.
Sentiment score
6.1
SonarQube's support receives mixed reviews; the active community and detailed documentation are crucial, especially for free users.
They need to increase the number of people for 24/7 support.
They were responsive even before we committed to buying their solution.
I also received full technical support, especially during the implementation.
The community support is quite effective.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.5
Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers scalable, adaptive performance in diverse environments, supported by AI and flexible licensing.
Sentiment score
7.0
SonarQube Server effectively supports scalability but may require more resources and careful setup for larger projects.
If I need to scale, I open a Whatsapp group with the director and the team, and we quickly proceed to do so.
They have sufficient resources, and there are no challenges from a scalability perspective.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.3
Check Point CloudGuard WAF is stable, reliable, with minimal interruptions, though some report configuration issues during license renewals.
Sentiment score
7.7
SonarQube Server is stable and reliable, with minor issues, enhanced in newer versions, and requires accurate configuration.
It is very stable.
It is very stable, never crashing or giving me an error that I can see.
I did not have any issues in the last three years during which I had more than ten critical services running on CloudGuard.
 

Room For Improvement

Check Point CloudGuard WAF needs clearer pricing, better support, enhanced features, improved integrations, and extended trial periods for users.
Users seek faster analysis, improved language support, better integration, enhanced security features, and refined usability and documentation.
The provider could improve by providing better guidance and support during the configuration process.
It's not something you manipulate, it's not an antivirus where you deal with signatures, updates, and upgrades every day.
I would say that the more automation this product has, the easier it will be to work with it.
 

Setup Cost

Check Point CloudGuard WAF pricing is debated for cost-effectiveness, differing by company size, needs, and feature packages.
SonarQube Server offers free and paid editions, with scalable pricing for advanced features and enterprise-grade support.
It is more expensive than f5, where we purchased everything as bundles, and Check Point costs more, but it is worth the money.
It is less costly than Cloudflare, Fortinet, and other vendors.
I know that its price is relatively expensive compared to other products but it gives benefits that are worth it.
The freemium version of SonarQube Server offers excellent value, especially compared to the high costs of Snyk.
 

Valuable Features

Check Point CloudGuard WAF offers seamless integration, AI-driven security, real-time monitoring, and reduced costs with proactive threat detection.
SonarQube Server excels with multi-language support, CI integration, security checks, and an open-source model with strong community backing.
Upon implementation and evaluation with third-party penetration testing, it meets rigorous security standards required for dealing with financial institutions.
It can protect against zero-day attacks and hidden anomalies.
The solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies effectively.
Some of the static code analysis capabilities are the most beneficial.
 

Categories and Ranking

Check Point CloudGuard WAF
Ranking in Application Security Tools
8th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (13th)
SonarQube Server (formerly ...
Ranking in Application Security Tools
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (1st), Software Development Analytics (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) is 24.5%, down from 27.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools
 

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.
Chetan Jayatheertha - PeerSpot reviewer
Has a great quality gate feature and improves the code coverage in your core base
We would like to have more visibility and more documentation, starting with the installation. It needs to be more standardized and explain all the features. We'd also like to get an idea of the level of stability we can get for our larger-sized projects. The notifications from the channel queue can be improved including email notifications. We currently rely on getting those notifications passed onto us and that should not be the case. The customization of different languages would also be helpful. If all the above could be implemented, SonarQube would be the best vulnerability security scanning tool.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
851,491 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Government
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?
I am less knowledgeable with prices because I only define the requirements and look at the execution. I know that its price is relatively expensive compared to other products but it gives benefits ...
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
I would like it to be able to analyze more complex functions, although I did not examine the case study of more complex implementations. Things like forum fields, etc seem to need a little more foc...
Is SonarQube the best tool for static analysis?
I am not very familiar with SonarQube and their solutions, so I can not answer. But if you are asking me about which tools that are the best for for Static Code Analysis, I suggest you have a look...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...
How would you decide between Coverity and Sonarqube?
We researched Coverity, but in the end, we chose SonarQube. SonarQube is a tool for reviewing code quality and security. It helps to guide our development teams during code reviews by providing rem...
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
Sonar
 

Interactive Demo

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point CloudGuard WAF vs. SonarQube Server (formerly SonarQube) and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,491 professionals have used our research since 2012.