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

Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs ReversingLabs comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 16, 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 Application Security Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (5th)
ReversingLabs
Ranking in Application Security Tools
40th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (42nd), Container Security (52nd), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (25th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (28th), Software Supply Chain Security (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is 0.7%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReversingLabs is 0.9%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)0.7%
ReversingLabs0.9%
Other98.4%
Application Security Tools
 

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.
TC
Forensic Lead, Global Security Fusion Center at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees
Very good malware and goodware repository and enables us to look more deeply at indicators of compromise
The automated static analysis of malware is the most valuable feature. Its detection abilities are very good. It hits all of the different platforms out there, platforms that see the items in the wild. Also, the solution’s object and file analysis provide us with actionable insights. Its malware and goodware repository is very good. It's very robust. It gets all of the different repositories that are out there that do analysis and brings them under one roof where we can statically analyze for those indicators of compromise and look at them more deeply. If we need to go deeper into things, we can do that.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Support is the same with on-premise devices, and it is very good. Since it is cloud-based, I do not need them as much."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF delivers clear efficiency gains over traditional WAFs in three main areas: operations, accuracy, and cost optimization."
"With the introduction of AI in general, Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides very high accuracy on the data, allowing me to avoid a lot of false positives and saving me time in determining if what I'm seeing is a possible attack."
"The solution preemptively blocks zero-day attacks and detects hidden anomalies effectively."
"Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is easy to deploy and provides a complete solution."
"The most effective CloudGuard feature for threat prevention is its web app protection."
"It offers good functionality of the application that is currently running."
"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."
"As far as the availability of the content is generally concerned and the number of malicious programs that can be looked up in the repository, these are very extensive."
"We have complete faith that it can do that for us, and can do it at scale."
"We had nothing in the environment to do such analysis, so it's been a savior in many ways."
"ReversingLabs has a large sample size."
"The automated static analysis of malware is the most valuable feature. Its detection abilities are very good. It hits all of the different platforms out there, platforms that see the items in the wild."
"It offers reports on a great many more file types than the other analysis solutions we have. It can give us a more in-depth analysis and better reporting on a larger number of file types. It also gives us a more comprehensive score on a number of things as well, and that's why we're using it as a front-end filter. It gives us more information... It's valuable because of its depth of information, as well as the breadth it gives us. There aren't a lot of tools that cover all of the different file types."
"As far as static analysis information is concerned, we use most of the information that is available in order to determine whether or not we might be dealing with a malware variant. This includes information that is related to Java rules. This is also related to malware families indicated or specific malicious software variants that are labeled by name."
"As far as the malware repository is concerned, it's extensive. It's a good source for finding samples, where we are unable to find them on other channels or by leveraging other sources."
 

Cons

"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."
"In my opinion, there is some room for improvement regarding pricing, which we require, and much of it relates to the license base and support."
"I have encountered issues with Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's technical support. It also has missing configuration features."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF can be improved; initially, the setup is very complicated, and there's not a lot of documentation available, plus it didn't have something for anti-bot, but other than that, it is fine."
"The user interface, SmartConsole, sometimes malfunctions and requires a restart."
"Improving the process for handling licensing renewals would be a welcome enhancement."
"It was costlier than other solutions."
"You need to know exactly the system. You cannot have someone running the system if they don't have the knowledge to do so."
"The solution needs to improve integrations."
"We would really like further integration with our threat intelligence platform, which is called ThreatConnect. We would also really like further integrations with an endpoint protection product we use called Tanium. The reason I mentioned both of these is that ReversingLabs claims to have extensive integrations with both of them, but they did not work for us."
"I would like to see if we could do a little bit more of bulk uploading of hash sets. Right now, I can only do them individually."
"The product support could be better at times. Sometimes, the resources that they provide could be of higher quality."
"While the company is very helpful, it would be very much appreciated to have extensive proof of concept scripts for the different APIs available, though not for all the APIs that we have purchased. Respective scripts are available, but those scripts which are available are typically not of very high quality."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I find the pricing to be reasonable."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."
"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 Application Security's pricing is comparable to other products in the market."
"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."
"It is not cheap, but it is worth it."
"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."
"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."
"We have a yearly contract based on the number of queries and malicious programs which can be processed."
"Currently, the license number of lookups that we purchased has not been reached yet, because the integration has only recently been completed. However, our usage is expected and planned to increase over the next couple of months."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
904,748 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
12%
University
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business39
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise25
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
All original equipment manufacturers mention zero-day attacks and the exploitation of previously unknown vulnerabilities, and Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) also includes this feature. A...
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) needs to offer more competitive pricing. There are many other cloud WAF products available, and when comparing costs, other vendors have a significant cost...
What is your primary use case for CloudGuard for Application Security?
I typically use Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) for protecting cloud workspaces, which includes cloud applications and websites hosted on cloud platforms, especially Amazon or Azure. My c...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Check Point CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard Application Security, CloudGuard AppSec
ReversingLabs Titanium, ReversingLabs secure.software
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Orange España, Paschoalotto
Financial services, healthcare, government, manufacturing, oil & gas, telecommunications, information technology
Find out what your peers are saying about Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) vs. ReversingLabs and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
904,748 professionals have used our research since 2012.