Checkpoints prevents the chain from being reorganized after a large number of confirmations have already passed. This is to prevent several days of transactions from being reversed.

IOTA's coordinator in contrast defines when a transaction can be considered confirmed.

They are nothing alike.

Hence the word analogous. They are both training wheels for their respective networks.

A checkpoint is in no way training wheels. It's for additional security.

Right. Perhaps comparing the coo to checkpoints isn't an apt analogy. However, the intent is the same. Without a coo, transactions would be probabilistic and confirmed once they went above a cumulative weight threshold, but the transaction volume is still too low to prevent a Sybil attack, hence the coo. It's still an open question whether or not the tangle can function coo-less, but it makes for an interesting experiment.