We performed a comparison between Check Point NGFW and WatchGuard Firebox based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The IPS is good. It protect my network from attackers."
"The most valuable feature is the bundled subscription, which is IPS, TV and web filtering."
"There is an easy process for configuring it, and it is straightforward to implement the device from scratch."
"We use the FortiGate Sandbox to detect zero-day vulnerabilities, such as anomalies or malware, that are unknown and have not yet been discovered."
"The technical support is great."
"It performs very well."
"The IPsec tunnels are very easily created, and quite interoperable with devices from other vendors."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a stable solution."
"The Smart Dashboard and other user interfaces are very easy to use and can be handled without any significant IT skills."
"Now we can add application signature in the same rule base & don't have to create a different policy for that."
"Check Point definitely has a great architecture, where you can just enable the software blades and deploy a secure service. Overall, it provides ease of deployment and ease of use."
"AV, IPS, AntiSpam, Sandbox. That's gentlemen set for any basic security, and it was implemented very well. In our reports, the most exciting results belong to AV and IPS. It can be explained by using ThreatCloud - a global knowledge base, which accumulates signatures for all existing and new coming malware, and all the Check Point solutions are always up to date with potential threats."
"It gives us centralized management for multiple firewalls. For example, if I want to push the same configuration in 10 firewalls, I can push it all at once with the help of the centralized management system."
"The features that I have found most valuable are its flexibility and user interface. This is already a well-established product in the market for quite a long time, more than 20 years. They've got a huge customer base."
"It is easy to deploy or upgrade. There is no need to do this manually with commands. This solution can be set up online."
"The solution is easy to administer thanks to its dashboards. The monitoring is really useful."
"I like their management features a lot. Their System Manager server as well the System Manager software make managing them, and tracking changes, very easy and complete."
"From my experience with their customer service team, I would say that they seem quite knowledgeable and fairly quick to respond."
"The reports are detailed."
"Simple to move settings between WatchGuard boxes."
"Firebox operates effectively in the background, blocking potential threats without a need for constant monitoring."
"The main reason we went with it was the security protocols. They were more robust on this device."
"There are many fantastic features."
"The set up was quite straightforward and we handled it in-house. It took a few hours to deploy the product."
"Fortinet FortiGate can improve by integrating the web application firewall and the DDoS protection part of the solution. Having a WAF feature, web application firewall, and proxy together would be a good benefit."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"One area for improvement is the performance on the bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"I could not configure sFlow from the FortiGate graphical user interface. I realized that the sFlow configuration is available only from the CLI, and discovered that sFlow is not supported on virtual interfaces, such as VDOM links, IPsec, or GRE."
"The support from Fortinet FortiGate could improve. They are not easily accessible when we need them. They could improve their response time."
"The pricing could be reduced or include the first year warranty."
"The stability of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"The visibility of the network can be better. The GUI can be improved for better visibility of the network flow. Other solutions have better GUI in terms of network visibility."
"Hopefully, in the future, these will be much more plug-and-play and orchestrated from a single administration console."
"The user interface should be user-friendly"
"The policy installation module should be improved."
"It is a bit expensive according to the required blades but it is a platform that is worth having as security in a corporate."
"I would like there to be a way to run packet captures more easily in the GUI environment. Right now, if we want to read packet captures, we have to do so from the command line."
"The tool’s architecture could be improved a bit."
"It would be great if the access management, the user management features, were improved in terms of the number of users that can be connected, and how users can access the various resources with the help of firewall authentication."
"My customers complain that the interface isn't user-friendly."
"Websense is an application that monitors and filters internet traffic. Websense was derived from WatchGuard. But when you go to WatchGuard to actually implement that particular feature, you have to use some type of additional feature and you have to pay for it, unfortunately. I think it should be free or free in the WatchGuard box itself, as an option. It would be nice if they didn't charge us for that."
"Setup of this solution is complex, it's not plug and play."
"It would be wonderful if the WatchGuard team develops nice products for threat intelligence."
"The documentation for the System Manager/Dimension configuration, could be a little bit clearer... The use case where you have multiple sites with multiple firewalls, and one site that has the System Manager server and the Dimension server, wasn't really well defined. It took me a little bit of digging to get that to actually work."
"There is a slight learning curve."
"The usability could be better, but it is definitely manageable. If we have to go to a backup internet connection, that could be a little bit easier."
"The scalability of the solution needs improvement."
"I'm not really impressed with the reporting side of it. It may be something I just haven't figured out very well, but it's hard to filter down on reporting of the actual valuable information that you would want. There is a lot of information out there so you have to have some kind of tool capture it and then filter through. So far, I haven't found the reporting side of the WatchGuard to be that user-friendly."
Check Point NGFW is ranked 5th in Firewalls with 277 reviews while WatchGuard Firebox is ranked 13th in Firewalls with 79 reviews. Check Point NGFW is rated 8.8, while WatchGuard Firebox is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Check Point NGFW writes "Good antivirus protection and URL filtering with very good user identification capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Firebox writes "Offers a streamlined deployment, intuitive interface and robust security features". Check Point NGFW is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense and Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall, whereas WatchGuard Firebox is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, OPNsense, SonicWall TZ and SonicWall NSa. See our Check Point NGFW vs. WatchGuard Firebox report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors, best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors, and best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.