No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 13, 2026

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 Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
8th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (5th), Web Application Firewall (WAF) (5th), DevSecOps (2nd)
Netskope Data Loss Preventi...
Ranking in Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
16th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Data Loss Prevention (DLP) category, the mindshare of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is 0.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is 2.1%, down from 3.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)0.7%
Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)2.1%
Other97.2%
Data Loss Prevention (DLP)
 

Featured Reviews

Krishnakumar Mahadevan - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
reviewer1595751 - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Manager at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Has improved sensitive data detection while requiring better support for data-at-rest scanning and classification
Data in transit works quite well and operates in near real-time. However, data at rest scanning operates under separate licensing, and it would be beneficial to examine applications where the location of sensitive data is unknown. Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) could improve data-at-rest scanning capabilities. Regarding DLP-specific improvements, data-at-rest scanning could be enhanced in terms of the applications supported, as coverage is currently limited to a restricted set of enterprise applications. Expanding application coverage would be beneficial. Additionally, data-at-rest scans should be made easier and faster to execute. Most solutions lack Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) functionality, and this capability is not yet mature. A significant limitation is that Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) does not support out-of-the-box data classification. Third-party integrations must be relied upon instead, whereas having built-in data classification support would be advantageous.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its fastest and most outstanding characteristic is ensuring a development line that will not lead to applying applications or code development."
"The integration with other Microsoft products, especially Visual Studio, is seamless."
"The data center security system has provided real-time analytics on performance and data configuration processes."
"Overall, the product is excellent."
"Before CloudGuard, we periodically had some website issues. Since we've had CloudGuard, we've never had these issues happen again."
"Compared to what we used before, it's helping us to be more efficient in managing our traffic."
"Machine learning is a valuable tool for this assessment because it allows for a two-phase approach: secure and non-secure."
"One of the best features of CloudGuard WAF is its user-friendly GUI dashboard."
"I find Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) easier and more appealing than Zscaler."
"The product provides visibility to manage sensitive data and control access."
"Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) provides predefined templates, indexed data matching, EDM, and OCR capabilities, and the role functionality provides significant information, and considerable automation has been built on top of the platform using the available APIs."
"The product is flexible."
"The Real-Time Analytics and Reporting capabilities of Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) are good and up to the mark."
 

Cons

"The creation of security profiles for each application takes a lot of time."
"CloudGuard for Application Security, like the other Check Point applications, has been presenting major latency problems when entering their administrative portal."
"You need to know exactly the system. You cannot have someone running the system if they don't have the knowledge to do so."
"They need improved latency in the main window."
"The user interface, SmartConsole, sometimes malfunctions and requires a restart."
"Multi-tenancy is an area where Check Point has room for improvement."
"We would like to have a solution of this type for the administration of applications from mobile devices."
"Pricing is high, although possibly justified by the service received."
"Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) can be improved primarily because we were looking for any other provider due to the ZTNA feature that we were scoping from Netskope."
"I rate the pricing a seven out of ten. The pricing is moderate."
"I have not seen any benefits from this real-time analysis at this time."
"Technical support has been rated low. Numerous bugs have been discovered in terms of functionality, and the support team takes considerable time to resolve these issues."
"The product should be compatible with multiple file formats."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is extremely affordable and high value for cost."
"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."
"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."
"As Infiniti customers, the pricing is manageable, as we have allowances dedicated to each Check Point product. The price is not as high compared to other options I have dealt with in the past."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF is expensive compared to Azure WAF."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"The pricing is moderate."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions are best for your needs.
911,493 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business56
Midsize Enterprise23
Large Enterprise36
No data available
 

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.
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...
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...
What needs improvement with Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?
Data in transit works quite well and operates in near real-time. However, data at rest scanning operates under separate licensing, and it would be beneficial to examine applications where the locat...
What is your primary use case for Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?
Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP) is being used as a Secure Services Engine (SSE) solution for the CASB solution, Shadow IT detection, and Secure Web Gateway capabilities. The primary focus is on...
What advice do you have for others considering Netskope Data Loss Prevention (DLP)?
Remediation involves blocking specific communications when users attempt to upload sensitive information. Users should be provided with an interface to request exceptions in real-time for business-...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Forcepoint, Check Point Software Technologies and others in Data Loss Prevention (DLP). Updated: August 2026.
911,493 professionals have used our research since 2012.