We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiGate-VM and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Fortinet FortiGate-VM is highly regarded for its robust security features, including geofencing, firewalling, IPS, antivirus, and a user-friendly interface. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls excel in embedded machine learning, real-time attack prevention, and the ability to accurately identify applications.
Fortinet FortiGate-VM needs enhancements in key activation, log management, cloud management, MFA offerings, web filter options, application inspection, GUI features, bandwidth issues, VPN connectivity, pricing, performance, and documentation. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls require improvements in SD-WAN customization, best practices, machine learning capabilities, troubleshooting tools,next-generation capabilities, rule creation, monitoring interface, bug fixing, configuration support, IoT security, traffic shaping, machine learning for virus prevention, security functions, usability, training programs, SSL inspection, external dynamic list feature, internet filtering, API integration, and bug fixing.
Service and Support: Some customers have praised the support team of Fortinet FortiGate-VM for their quick response times and knowledge. However, other customers have mentioned slow response times and difficulties in finding information quickly. Customer service for Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls has received mixed reviews. Some customers have praised the knowledgeable support team and timely issue resolution. However, others have mentioned difficulties in reaching the support team and issues with the support ticketing system.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Fortinet FortiGate-VM is generally straightforward and easy, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is not complex and easy. Prior knowledge can simplify Fortinet's setup, whereas Palo Alto may require proper planning.
Pricing: Fortinet offers flexible pricing options with no extra expenses, while Palo Alto is considered pricier. Nevertheless, Palo Alto is known for its reliability and high performance as a firewall solution.
ROI: Fortinet FortiGate-VM offers enhanced stability and heightened security. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls provide greater visibility, reporting capabilities, and streamlined management.
Comparison Results: Fortinet FortiGate-VM is the preferred solution as it is highly recommended due to its easy setup, robust security features, cost-effectiveness, and satisfactory ROI. Users find it user-friendly, easy to deploy, and with an intuitive interface.
"Good load balancing feature."
"The IPsec tunnels are very easily created, and quite interoperable with devices from other vendors."
"Consolidated our network environment at all locations, but mainly at our datacenter."
"Unified Threat Management (UTM) features."
"The threat prevention is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"The most valuable features are the possibility of having one fabric for switching on security."
"It's a user-friendly firewall. Most of the tasks are very simple. It's simple to configure and troubleshoot this firewall."
"It is simple to manage, and there are a lot of functionalities in the same box."
"It provides an ease of management and configuration as well."
"A top feature is the really good web interface and the classic Fortinet features, such as IPS, IDS, AV scanner, and spam filter."
"I like the visibility and monitoring features because they're easy to use to monitor traffic. Features like geo-blocking and more have AI, and we're currently using all of it. But for now, we're only using geo-blocking, and we're able to block traffic from different countries. I also like that it's highly responsive. VM04 is also very powerful."
"The tool improved the security in our company's virtualized environment, as it was helpful in creating an additional layer of security for the organization and for the use of the internet."
"The customer care center of Fortinet is good. For all the requests that we have done, they work as fast as possible, so this is a good point for Fortinet."
"The functionality provided is very good."
"Fortinet FortiGate-VM is purpose-built as a next-generation firewall, excelling in its performance of this specific function."
"All the security features that are built into the product are valuable."
"It is very scalable."
"DNS Security is a good feature because, in the real world with web threats, you can block all web threats and bad sites. DNS Security helps to prevent those threats. It's also very helpful with Zero-day attacks because DNS Security blocks all DNS requests before any antivirus would know that such requests contain a virus or a threat to your PC or your network."
"The best feature is the packet inspection; compared to solutions like Cisco and FortiGate, Palo Alto's packet inspection is much less CPU intensive, allowing it to detect threats embedded within packages more quickly and efficiently."
"The basic configuration will only take 15 minutes to set up"
"All the features are valuable, but my main one is the straightforward and well-designed GUI. I'm over 50 and have been in this business since the internet started. I'm not a GUI guy; I prefer using the command line. The product's GUI is excellent, and so is the threat intelligence. It's also straightforward to configure and flexible. The solution even has good networking, such as VLAN and subinterfaces, which is great because, in my experience, if the firewall is good, then the router usually isn't and vice-versa, but Palo Alto has both."
"It is pretty important to have embedded machine learning in the core of the firewall to provide inline, real-time attack prevention, because all these different attacks and threats are constantly evolving. So, you want to have something beyond just hard pass rules. You want it to learn as it is going along. Its machine learning seems pretty good. It seems like it is catching quite a few things."
"The centralization capability is the most valuable feature of this solution as it enables us to monitor our systems efficiently."
"Good functionality and features."
"I need user-behavior analytics, to find threat scenarios from inside the organization, insider attacks. That would be very helpful for us. In addition, I would like next-generation features for small and medium businesses. These businesses require UTM, all in one product. Fortinet must include it."
"The support costs and licensing are sometimes so expensive."
"Their software support needs improvement. I would prefer to have better support for bug fixes. Sometimes, we open a ticket, and it is very difficult to get a solution. Specifically, we are not at all happy with their support for load balancing."
"The solution can have more features in a single box that can be multi-applied to integrate everything."
"The firmware needs improvement because there are bugs when a new release comes through. Sometimes, the configuration changes, and it's a bit harder to see where the fail is. The first time that you have the firmware, it tends to have some issues, and it's better to wait a bit to update the equipment."
"The support system could be improved."
"Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve the protection, it did not prevent us from being attacked. Additionally, Fortinet FortiGate could provide more features for WAF devices. I should not have to purchase two solutions, it would be a benefit to combine these features into one solution."
"The license renewal process, annual renewal price, and the web application firewall features should be improved."
"The product needs to focus on cloud-nativeness and pricing."
"Capacity-wise, I think the solution's log storage area is something that needs to be increased since, by default, it stores logs for only seven days."
"The tool does not have a good name in the market, consisting of enterprise-class businesses, making it an area where the product lacks and needs to improve."
"Support could be improved a little."
"Fortinet devices are acknowledged as highly potent and come with a notable cost. These devices offer extensive visibility, an array of configurations, and a range of security features. However, there's room for enhancement in their routing and switching security aspects, akin to Cisco's offerings. A noteworthy aspect here is Meraki, which offers cloud controllers. If FortiGate were to introduce a similar cloud management solution, it could strongly compete with both Meraki and Cisco products. Cisco operates in two sectors: enterprise and SMB. Particularly in the SMB market, they hold sway due to their convenient cloud management features. For instance, Meraki's cameras and wireless access points can be easily controlled through their cloud management portal. If FortiGate were to provide cloud-based management solutions for SMB customers, it could cater to a significant portion of the market, considering that a substantial number of customers fall within the SMB and mid-level enterprise categories."
"The biggest area for improvement is storage configuration. It could be smoother."
"The user interface (UI) and the performance of interface both need improvement."
"The performance could be better. Some features need to have quality control when the switch is working. The dedicated bandwidth for some users is not reliable."
"I would like integration with Evident.io and RedLock."
"There are some advanced features that we aren't able to use, which include active IP authentication and app ID. We are facing challenges with implementing those two features."
"I like the reports, but I wish the reporting was a little better. When I set up the automatic reports to come in, they're pretty basic. I would like them to be a little more advanced at the ACC monitoring and things like that. I still enjoy all the daily alerts that I get and all the daily PDFs and reports, but I just feel that it could expand upon the visualization of the reports."
"The customer-facing side needs to be improved in terms of the engagement and involvement of support staff."
"The advanced manual protection needs to be improved a little bit because they used to make a cloud manual analysis for the cloud."
"We have a lot of the older firewall models, i.e., the PA-220. It seems that with newer operating systems the PA-220 is becoming slower than when I first bought it. It is not really an issue for users who are passing traffic through the firewall, but more from the management access of it."
"The built-in machine learning features provide some automation, but I think there should be an option for manual review because nothing replaces the human eye."
"The solution could offer better pricing. We'd like it if it could be a bit more affordable for us."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiGate-VM is ranked 9th in Firewalls with 113 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 163 reviews. Fortinet FortiGate-VM is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiGate-VM writes "An easy-to-manage and configure tool that provides ample documentation to help with the setup phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". Fortinet FortiGate-VM is most compared with Azure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, Fortinet FortiOS, OPNsense and Cisco Secure Firewall, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Netgate pfSense. See our Fortinet FortiGate-VM vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls report.
See our list of 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.
In the best tradition of these questions, Feature-wise both are quite similar, but each has things it's better at, it kind of depends what you value most.
PA is good at app control, web filtering and such like, they have always been top of the pile there. The GUI is very good, and their product is very user-focused.
Fortinet is good for scalability and predictable high throughput (ASICs in the hardware), and useful things like authentication flexibility, CLI config (if you have any networking/Cisco people, they always seem to prefer CLI over GUI) and have better OT features, maybe relevant to your manufacturing use?
Fortinet seem to have a broader integration offering with their security fabric than PA do, plus they can do Fortinet-based wifi, switching, etc. Depends if you are prepared to go all-in with a single vendor.
Hi,
Both FT and PA have compelling features for large Enterprises. I would like to add a few good points about Fortinetwhich might be helpful ( from my 13 years of engagement with them as Distributor and Partner)
Fortinet:
Have higher throughput; which comes with competitive rates
Wide range of models to select to meet your requirement, without spending heavliy
Outstanding customer support and very active customer care team
Easly available skilled resources from the channel for deployment and post-implementation support
Regards
Abhilash
Hello. The question is what you are going to have as a result of application