We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and pfSense based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The main difference between the two solutions is that Meraki MX is expensive, while pfSense is an open-source solution and is free of charge. In addition, Meraki’s monitoring capabilities could use improvement.
"The payment function for applications is good."
"Layer-3 firewall and routing are the most valuable features."
"The solution is scalable."
"It's very good and very stable for businesses. It works very well."
"It's user-friendly and easy to operate."
"Whenever I need something, Fortinet improves and updates the software for me."
"It's quite comfortable to handle the FortiGate firewall."
"The tool is a nice product and easy to handle. The software's user interface is also good. You can easily implement remote access in the solution."
"The initial setup for me was straightforward."
"They have very good technical support and I have relied heavily on them."
"Meraki makes it easy to be secure and know where the holes are to fix them. We have been fixing anything that we have ever found for 20 years. We keep up-to-date with firmware upgrades. We just try to stay on top of everything for security, like maintaining updates and getting rid of old systems. I feel like we're on top of it."
"We've had no issues with the scalability or the stability of this solution"
"Traffic Shaping: The device lets you decide how you want to use your internet services. Due to the fact that Meraki can accept dual WAN, you can decide the way you balance the data traffic."
"It has very good features; it's easy to use, configure, set up, and deploy."
"I think cloud management is key. The cloud management and support are the two things that make the product great."
"What I like best about Meraki MX is that it's easy to deploy remotely. The product works. It has automatic updates. I also like that Meraki MX is a brilliant device. You turn it on, stick the key in there, activate it, and then you're done. Meraki MX does what my customers need at the end of the day, so I also like that."
"The solution is fairly scalable when it comes to integrating with other applications and data sets."
"Its features rival many of the high cost solutions out there."
"The firewall sensor is highly effective, and it's easy to deploy. You can deploy pfSense with limited hardware resources. It's not necessary to have an appliance with much RAM to make it work. It's cost-effective and performs well."
"The built-in open VPN and the VPN Client Export are the solution's most valuable aspects."
"The initial setup was straightforward, therefore I wanted to continue using the product."
"The most valuable feature, for instance, is the ease of migrating configurations between different Netgate devices housed in the same box."
"The initial setup was simple and fast."
"What I found most valuable is the cost of the platform, the flexibility of the platform, and the fact that the ongoing fees are not there as they are with the competitor. Some people may think you're taking a risk with using Opensource. I think it just provides the end user, specifically for us small, medium business providers of services, the flexibility we need at the right cost to provide them a higher end, almost enterprise type service."
"The support is the main thing that needs to be improved."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The support team for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be more customer friendly."
"The non-error conserve mode has room for improvement."
"One area for improvement is the performance on the bandwidth demands for smaller devices, as well as better web filtering."
"The solution needs to improve its integration with cybersecurity."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"It is quite new for us, and we need to go more in-depth into the monitoring tools. It provides different features that we need to do what we want. So far, it is okay for us. In terms of improvement, in the future, they can provide a faster implementation of features. Some of the features are first available in other solutions. Fortinet sometimes takes a little bit longer than other solutions, such as Check Point, to implement new features."
"The whole Cisco Meraki range requires easier access for cameras. For a security center, it would be helpful to have easier access to cameras through the portal. Its licensing cost could also be better."
"Right now, you can postpone the update but eventually, if you don't do the update, it will install the updates automatically for you and that's something that is not working for me."
"I do not have the kind of feature I need for SSL decryption in Meraki MX. It would be great to see the SSL decryption feature in Meraki MX."
"Meraki MX firewalls are great for small to medium-sized businesses, but other solutions are better for enterprise-sized companies."
"The only stability issue is in Content Filtering. Sometimes we need to report these types of issues to Cisco support."
"The solution's pricing should be reduced."
"An area for improvement in Meraki MX is that it needs some provision, as supplying the unit through Cisco can be tedious at times, but as far as the product itself and its offerings, Meraki MX is five-star all the way."
"We have been having a problem with the VPN. When the energy goes down and is back again, the VPN link doesn't get established. We have to manually turn off the modems and other pieces of equipment and manually establish the VPN. It has been around one month since we have been having this problem, and we don't have enough support from Meraki to solve the problem."
"User interface is a little clumsy."
"pfSense could improve by having a sandboxing feature that I have seen in SonicWall. However, maybe it is available I am not aware of it."
"Perhaps the documentation is not clear and because it is supported in the community there is no basic documentation."
"The integration of pfSense with EPS and EDS could be better. Also, it should be easier to get reports on how many users are connecting simultaneously and how sections connect in real-time."
"My only observation is about the quality of the IPSec logs, which are difficult to interpret and are poor in filters."
"The VPN feature of the solution could improve by adding better functionality and providing easier configure ability."
"pfSense is not user-friendly. I hope to have something to make the interfaces more user-friendly."
"There could be a way to remote to it through a mobile app. You can always browse through your browser on your mobile phone or tablet, but it would be good to have a dedicated app. I understand that iOS and Android developers are expensive, but there should be a mobile app."
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 59 reviews while Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and SonicWall NSa, whereas Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, KerioControl, Sophos UTM and Zyxel Unified Security Gateway. See our Meraki MX vs. Netgate pfSense 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.