Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF)
Reviews
Star rating
Rank in API Security
Pros and cons
Pros
- Protection
- Security
- DDoS Protection
- Cybersecurity
- WAF (Web Application Firewall)
- Setup Ease
Cons
- Complex Setup
- Expensive
- Learning Difficulty
- Difficult Learning Curve
- UX Improvement
- User Interface Issues
Traffic & LLM citations
Source: G2 review data
Winning from
Key stats
Adoption by company size
| Segment | Share of reviews |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 28.4% |
| Mid-Market | 54.5% |
| Enterprise | 17.0% |
Quarterly history
| Quarter | Reviews | Star rating |
|---|---|---|
| 2024 Q4 | 5 | 4.1 |
| 2025 Q2 | 13 | 4.5 |
| 2025 Q3 | 2 | 4.3 |
| 2025 Q4 | 18 | 4.4 |
| 2026 Q1 | 13 | 4.2 |
| 2026 Q2 | 18 | 4.3 |
| 2026 Q3 | 10 | 4.0 |
Satisfaction ratings
What reviewers say
Strong Security, Centralized Visibility, and Seamless Check Point Ecosystem Integration
“What I like best about Check Point WAF (formerly CloudGuard WAF) is its strong balance of security, visibility, and ease of management. It provides effective protection against common web application threats while giving security teams centralized visibility and control. I also l”
Strong Security with Ease of Management
“I like Check Point WAF's strong security capabilities combined with ease of management. The policy management is flexible, which is really helpful. Plus, the initial setup is relatively straightforward, making the transition smoother.”
Strong Web Traffic Visibility, But a Steep Learning Curve
“What I like most about Check Point WAF is its clear visibility into web traffic and blocked requests. It makes it easy to identify suspicious activity and fine-tune security policies. Once configured, it provides reliable protection with minimal day-to-day effort.”