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
7.1
Number of Reviews
60
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (5th)
ReversingLabs
Ranking in Application Security Tools
38th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (40th), Container Security (50th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (25th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (28th), Software Supply Chain Security (18th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is 0.6%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ReversingLabs is 0.8%, 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)0.6%
ReversingLabs0.8%
Other98.6%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Mohan Janarthanan - PeerSpot reviewer
Associate Vice President at Novac Technology Solutions
Integrated web protection has reduced breaches and now prevents attacks across critical apps
I have been using it for six months, and the biggest advantages for me are that Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) offers more than other F5 firewalls, which have only application protection called ASM (Application Security Monitoring). In contrast, Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) provides protection on IPS along with application protection. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) itself provides an IPS function where I can protect against my Layer 7 traffic, which is not available in other vendors. The traditional WAF does not have the capacity of IPS functions. The intrusion prevention capability, I can only see in Layer 3 functions and stateful functions, which is the traditional firewall capability. Other vendors are keeping this in their Web Application Firewall, but Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) has integrated it differently. False positives are significantly less here compared to traditional Web Application Firewalls because they are more focused on the AI front. Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) integrates an AI platform within the Web Application itself using API protection with AI and what they call GenAI protection. They excel at creating the profile itself, which is the basic functionality of WAF. Normally, I deploy in preventive mode, which takes some time for learning, but I prefer to operate in preventing mode only.
CSOInfor4e0d - PeerSpot reviewer
CSO - Information Security at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We use the product for data enrichment or downloading malicious programs that we are otherwise unable to find
It's integrated in our product. We leverage the API, but it doesn't contribute to increasing the release time of the product itself. 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. This could be an area where the company can generally improve. It is not a big issue for us, since we have our own development team, but it could be an issue for other companies who are less mature.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I have thousands of exposed websites and APIs. Being able to control what is happening and try to prevent any attack is the best feature."
"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."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security is the one-stop solution for the security of applications and providing API protection to servers and facilities 24/7."
"I rate it ten out of ten."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF has positively impacted my organization by significantly improving both security and operational efficiency, with a noticeable reduction in web-based threats, especially automated attacks and vulnerability exploits, thanks to its real-time prevention and reputation filter that has streamlined my workflow through automatic policy updates and integration smoothly with my CI/CD pipelines, allowing my DevOps teams to deploy security without delays."
"The DirectStorage gives me a vision that I did not have of the check that occurs on the web servers."
"Overall, the product is excellent."
"Check Point CloudGuard WAF provides great visibility and flexibility to use multiple FQDNs in a single load balancer."
"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."
"We have complete faith that it can do that for us, and can do it at scale."
"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."
"We had nothing in the environment to do such analysis, so it's been a savior in many ways."
"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."
"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

"CloudGuard for Application Security, like the other Check Point applications, has been presenting major latency problems when entering their administrative portal."
"The learning curve was a challenge due to initially incorrect configurations."
"The user interface, SmartConsole, sometimes malfunctions and requires a restart."
"Deeper and more transparent integration between Cloud Application Security and analysis monitoring tools could be very valuable - although the solution currently offers integrations with third-party security tools."
"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."
"There are occasions when it interfaces with other systems, leading to a loss of visibility."
"They might be able to add more integrations."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security needs to improve updates on integrations. It also needs to incorporate real-time monitoring features."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to see if we could do a little bit more of bulk uploading of hash sets."
"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 solution needs to improve integrations."
"The product support could be better at times. Sometimes, the resources that they provide could be of higher quality."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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"
"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."
"The pricing is competitive compared to other solutions on the market. So, the licensing cost is average."
"The tool's licensing costs are yearly and competitive."
"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 base solution costs approximately 30,000 euros, with an additional 2,000 euros per year for licenses and support."
"Check Point CloudGuard Application Security's pricing is not friendly."
"Considering all the benefits we've observed, we find the price to be satisfactory."
"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."
"We have a yearly contract based on the number of queries and malicious programs which can be processed."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
896,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Construction Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business37
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise21
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CloudGuard for Application Security?
Pricing is a little bit high compared to other OEMs, and the setup cost was handled by a partner.
What needs improvement with CloudGuard for Application Security?
Check Point CloudGuard WAF can be improved in several ways. We have faced slowness issues in our network after onboarding it on any application. The cost can be higher than traditional WAF solution...
What is your primary use case for CloudGuard for Application Security?
I use Check Point CloudGuard WAF for web application and API protection. I can provide a scenario where I used Check Point CloudGuard WAF to defend against an SQL injection attack on a web app. It ...
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: April 2026.
896,510 professionals have used our research since 2012.