Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs Kiuwan comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Check Point Software Technologies and Kiuwan are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Check Point Software Technologies is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.7, while Kiuwan is ranked #34. Check Point Software Technologies holds a 1.1% mindshare in AS, compared to Kiuwan’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Check Point Software Technologies users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of Kiuwan users who would recommend it.

Check Point WAF (formerly C...

Read 81 Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) reviews

13,647 Views
4,231 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Kiuwan

Read 23 Kiuwan reviews

4,464 Views
3,527 Comparison Views

93% willing to recommend

Check Point WAF (formerly C...

Kiuwan

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 13, 2026

Kiuwan and Check Point WAF compete in the domain of application security solutions, focusing on code quality and web application protection respectively. Check Point WAF seems to have the upper hand given its advanced security capabilities, such as AI-driven threat prevention and zero-day attack protection, which are critical for handling diverse IT challenges.

Features: Kiuwan provides quick code scanning, integration with Jenkins and JIRA, and supports various programming languages. Check Point WAF offers AI-driven threat prevention, zero-day attack protection, and API security, making it ideal for comprehensive web application protection.

Room for Improvement: Kiuwan can enhance language and framework support, UI, and integration with Azure DevOps. Check Point WAF could simplify its UI, reduce setup complexity, and improve API security depth and bot protection.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kiuwan supports on-premises and hybrid cloud environments with fast deployment but needs to improve customer support. Check Point WAF offers broader cloud environment support and generally positive customer service, though it faces initial setup complexity.

Pricing and ROI: Kiuwan is cost-effective with a subscription model based on lines of code and offers good time-to-market and code quality improvements. Check Point WAF is pricier regarding licensing and setup costs but is justified by its comprehensive features. Both are seen as valuable investments, with Kiuwan focusing on cost-effectiveness and Check Point WAF offering stronger security features at a higher cost.

To learn more, read our detailed Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Kiuwan Report (Updated: November 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Kiuwan

November 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,336 peers since 2012

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 WAF (formerly C...

Ranking in Application Security Tools

5th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (9th), Web Application Firewall (WAF) (5th), DevSecOps (2nd)

Kiuwan

Ranking in Application Security Tools

34th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (29th)

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is 1.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiuwan is 1.2%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)	1.1%
Kiuwan	1.2%
Other	97.7%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Krishnakumar Mahadevan

CISO at Spink Solutions Private Limited

Cloud security has strengthened risk posture and improved advanced threat visibility

There are some API gateway and API securities I mentioned. If these are incorporated with AI-related features, particularly those seven key vulnerabilities I mentioned—token theft and tool poisoning—that would be beneficial. AI-related features are not included yet in Check Point CloudGuard WAF. However, they are present in FortiGate. That is the advantage of FortiGate now. FortiGate is stopping all AI-related vulnerabilities now. FortiGate has this capability. It is unfortunate that even Palo Alto also lacks one or two of these features. Check Point Quantum is very good, without a doubt. However, their capabilities are not in comparison with Palo Alto. There are some features, but there are some gaps in comparison with Palo Alto.

Read full review

Mustufa Bhavnagarwala

CyberRisk Solution Advisor at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees

Though a stable tool, the UI needs improvement

Kiuwan can improve its UI a little more. The user experience can be made better. Kiuwan offers a user interface that is similar to the one offered by Windows 7 or Windows 98, which I saw when I ran the tool and tried to scan the repository to find the security issues. The product's UI has certain shortcomings, where improvements are required.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have had a number of real events where developers accidentally made commits of API keys, and we were able to detect and begin response actions in minutes. We had the API key revoked in less than five minutes in such events."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF has positively impacted our organization in security and operational efficiency, with a 30-40% drop in malicious traffic and a 15-20% reduction in manual intervention for our SOC team due to reduced false positives and automated protection."

"The best feature of Check Point CloudGuard WAF is its advanced threat prevention, which is integrated with Check Point threat cloud intelligence providing real-time protection against web application attacks, including zero-day threats, automatically sourced from the threat cloud, Check Point threat intelligence database, analyzing millions of indicators of compromise daily."

"The data center security system has provided real-time analytics on performance and data configuration processes."

"I find the configuration and real-time monitoring features valuable."

"They offer free trials, which is quite appreciative and grabs more attention from new users and businesses."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF has improved our organization by providing protection against web application attacks such as SQL injection, cross-site scripting, and bot threats."

"One of the best features of CloudGuard WAF is its user-friendly GUI dashboard."

More Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) pros

"The feature that I have found the most valuable in Kiuwan is the speed of scanning. Compared to other SaaS tools I have used, Kiuwan is much quicker in performing scans. I have not yet used it on a large code base, but from what I have experienced, it is efficient and accurate. Additionally, I have used it both manually and in an automated pipeline, and both methods have been effective. The speed of scanning is what makes it valuable to me."

"I like that it provides a detailed report that lets you know the risk index and the vulnerability."

"We use Kiuwan to locate the source of application vulnerabilities."

"Kiuwan has enabled us to give our customers peace of mind through early identification of code vulnerabilities and remediation before delivery to the customer."

"We have been using this solution for one and a half years."

"We switched because Kiuwan covers the entire SDLC; provides direct information to act upon, for the developer, architects, QA, CIO and CISO, in a few seconds; automatically, fully integrated in any CI/CD setup."

"Software analytics for a lot of different languages including ABAP."

"In our digital marketing efforts, our app is in continuous integration and having introduced this tool ensures we are always delivering safe code."

More Kiuwan pros

Cons

"I do not know if it is already there, but I would like to have complete visibility between the posture management and firewall as a service."

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF's support is only available in English."

"It was costlier than other solutions."

"The reporting can be improved."

"The trial version should be extended further so that QA test engineers can actually test the utilities in a real sense and can provide the maximum amount of feedback for enhancements."

"Regarding the false positive rate, we need to configure it according to our environment because unless we configure it according to our environment, it's a tedious process, particularly with Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF), and sometimes if it's not configured properly, there are more than 60% of false positives that we receive."

"CloudGuard could improve in areas such as ease of integration with Fortinet and reducing costs associated with deployment in cloud environments like Azure."

"The UI interface needs improvement because there are a number of bugs. Integration with the SIEM platform is currently one of the key challenges that need to be addressed."

More Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) cons

"The development-to-delivery phase."

"Kiuwan's support has room for improvement. You can only open a ticket is through email, and the support team is outside of our country. They should have a support number or chat."

"I would like to see additional languages supported."

"The pricing and licensing models are poor."

"The next release should include more flexibility in the reporting."

"Improvement could be made with the integration of the programming tools."

"The integration process could be improved. It'll also help if it could generate reports automatically. But I'm not sure about the effectiveness of the reports. This is because, in our last project, we still found some key issues that weren't captured by the Kiuwan report."

"In Kiuwan there are sometimes duplicates found in the dependency scan under the "insights" tab. It's unclear to me why these duplicates are appearing, and it would be helpful if the application teams could investigate further."

More Kiuwan cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."

"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 pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."

"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."

"I find the pricing to be reasonable."

"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."

"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."

"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."

More Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) pricing and cost advice

"Check with your account manager."

"I recommend contacting a sales person who will create the best plan payment plan for you, as we did."

"This solution is cheaper than other tools."

"Nothing special. It's a very fair model."

"It follows a subscription model. I think the price is somewhere in the middle."

"Kiuwan is an open-source solution and free to use."

"The price of Kiuwan is lower than that of other tools on the market."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

920,336 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Outsourcing Company

15%

Computer Software Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Construction Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	57
Midsize Enterprise	24
Large Enterprise	40

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	6

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?

It is a little bit expensive, but the pricing model is acceptable, though a reduction would make it more competitive with leaders such as Palo Alto.

See all answers

What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?

The false positive rate is a concern, but I could recommend improvements where false positives have to be minimized better. This all depends on how the rules are customized and configured, and it c...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for CloudGuard for Application Security?

The main purpose is to have network security through machine learning, which can offer threat detection and intelligence for my endpoints, and I am looking for application security. I am looking fo...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Compared 5% of the time

Palo Alto Networks Enterprise Data Loss Prevention vs Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Compared 5% of the time

AWS WAF vs Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Compared 5% of the time

Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks vs Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Compared 5% of the time

Cloudflare Web Application Firewall vs Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

Compared 4% of the time

More Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) Competitors

SonarQube vs Kiuwan

Compared 15% of the time

Veracode vs Kiuwan

Compared 12% of the time

GitHub vs Kiuwan

Compared 5% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Kiuwan

Compared 5% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Kiuwan

Compared 4% of the time

More Kiuwan Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)

October 2026

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) report

Download Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) product report

Buyer's Guide

Kiuwan

October 2026

Download Kiuwan product report

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec, Check Point CloudGuard Code Security

No data available

Overview

Check Point WAF offers a robust security framework with AI-driven threat detection and seamless integration, protecting applications and APIs in multi-cloud environments.

Effective in preemptively blocking threats through AI and machine learning, Check Point WAF reduces false positives and operational workload. Its integration capabilities and threat intelligence provide comprehensive protection against zero-day attacks, while centralized management facilitates cost-effective and insightful threat reporting.

What are the main features of Check Point WAF?

AI and Machine Learning: Preemptively blocks threats without signature reliance.
Centralized Management: Simplifies oversight and reduces costs.
Threat Intelligence: Enhances security posture against zero-day attacks.
Ease of Deployment: Quick setup with user-friendly interface.
Comprehensive Protection: Guards against SQL injection and DDoS attacks.

What benefits should be considered by users?

Reduced False Positives: Minimizes operational interruptions.
Cost-effectiveness: Reduces management overhead.
Insightful Reporting: Enables swift response to threats.
Seamless Integration: Enhances security processes with existing tools.

Check Point WAF is employed in industries securing web applications and APIs, especially in multi-cloud environments. It effectively protects backend services, prevents unauthorized access, and monitors traffic, making it suitable for businesses with diverse infrastructures. It ensures compliance with security standards and adapts to fluctuating traffic patterns.

Check Point Software Technologies

Kiuwan offers comprehensive security and vulnerability testing capabilities, focusing on code analysis, fast scanning, and detailed risk assessments. Supporting many technologies, it integrates well into development workflows to ensure code compliance and enhance code quality.

Known for its application portfolio governance, Kiuwan provides fast scanning and reporting features, alongside an intuitive interface. It supports languages from COBOL to JavaScript, offering modular capabilities and security integration for continuous deployment. Developers can perform efficient local or cloud-based scans, benefiting from action plans for better code correction. Integration with tools like Jenkins facilitates quick processing and detailed risk assessments, while challenges remain in language support expansion and smoother integration with Azure DevOps and popular IDEs. Enhanced frameworks and mobile development testing would amplify its utility, with users seeking improved navigation, report downloading, and technical support.

What are the most important features of Kiuwan?

Fast Scanning: Provides quick scans for immediate insights.
Reporting: Robust features for generating detailed reports.
Intuitive UI: Easy-to-navigate interface.
Technology Coverage: Supports a range of languages from COBOL to JS.
Tool Integration: Seamlessly integrates with Jenkins for CI/CD processes.
Modularity: Allows specific models for targeted analysis.

What benefits or ROI should users look for in Kiuwan reviews?

Enhanced Code Security: Identifies vulnerabilities swiftly and efficiently.
Continuous Integration: Facilitates ongoing security assessments.
Improved Code Compliance: Helps maintain adherence to coding standards.
Actionable Insights: Provides risk assessments with actionable recommendations.

In industries focused on software development, Kiuwan is integral for security and vulnerability assessments. It's embedded into workflows to analyze, detect and correct vulnerabilities, addressing threats like SQL injection and adhering to OWASP Top 10. The tool supports secure coding practices and performance evaluation, aiding organizations in maintaining rigorous security standards.

Kiuwan

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto

DHL, BNP Paribas, Zurich, AXA, Ernst & Young, KFC, Santander, Latam, Ferrovial

Buyer's Guide

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Kiuwan

November 2026

Free Report: Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Kiuwan

Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Kiuwan and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,336 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. Kiuwan report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.