We performed a comparison between OPNsense 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."This version is stable. I don't have any issues with this solution, in our environment, it works well."
"The integration with Active Directory is one of the good features. Most of the customers are now looking for the Single Sign-on feature. So, being able to integrate Active Directory with the firewall is useful. It is also easy."
"I have found Fortinet FortiGate to be scalable."
"With FortiClient, you can easily connect when you are home, check out what you want to do, and connect to your network when you are not at work. You can switch on servers and you can check what is wrong."
"The most important features of Fortinet FortiGate are the Intrusion Prevention System (IPS) and firewall control applications."
"The solution is very user friendly. The user interface in particular is quite nice."
"The email protection and VPN features are the most valuable."
"The pipe filter application is an outstanding feature."
"The initial implementation process is simple."
"It has an open license. It works very well, and there is an update every month."
"The solution has high availability."
"The VPN server feature is the most valuable. It is integrated with Radius and AAA for doing accounting and authentication. Insight view is also an important feature for me at this time. It allows me to assess our network traffic. I also like the firewall feature. The BSD kernel has a packet filter. It is one of the most solid frameworks for firewalls. Its user interface is one of the best interfaces I have used."
"We have been operating here in our lab for several months, and everything appears to be extremely stable."
"The solution is good for a basic firewall for a small business or for home use."
"OPNsense could improve by making the configuration more web-based rather than shell or command-line-based."
"It has firewall and VPN capabilities, which are very valuable features."
"The client is easy to use and stable"
"The most valuables feature of WatchGuard Firebox are the VPNs, and web filtering where we can stop users from going to malicious sites."
"The main features of the solution are the control of the site-to-site network access and the overall features."
"I like that this product has very few issues."
"WatchGuard Firebox's two-factor authentication feature is particularly useful and provides an added layer of protection."
"The most valuable features are the VPN and web blocker security."
"Their support is excellent, and the stability is very good."
"All of the features have been valuable. There's nothing on my M270 that I'm not using. If you have remote access, you can see how many users are coming from the outside world to be connected to the systems, through the virus systems that we have behind the firewall, in order to gain access to their files and do their work. We can also see how long they stay online and whether these connections are closed forcefully or for any other reasons, such as a glitch or some kind of misbehavior, to see if internet traffic is optimized and if that particular traffic is under company policies, concerning which websites were visited."
"It is stable, but its stability can be improved."
"Pricing for it is a bit high. It could be cheaper."
"They should improve high CPU and memory usage that occurs."
"The support team for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be more customer friendly."
"Some configuration elements cannot be easily altered once created."
"Technical support could be better. You don't always get the level of help you need right away."
"While FortiGate is cheaper than most other solutions, we're seeing increased license renewal costs. Most of our clients are asking for more significant discounts because the price is going up."
"For the migration, everyone has a firewall in use and I am selling Fortinet. Typically, I am replacing another firewall. Previously, there was a tool available to convert configurations from one firewall, such as Palo Alto, to Fortinet, but this tool is no longer free. If it could be made free again, it would be very beneficial."
"In terms of improvement, the performance could be enhanced."
"Its interface should be a little bit better."
"The ability to set the VPN IP address would be a welcome addition."
"The solution could be more secure."
"I would like to see better SD-WAN performance."
"The user interface could be improved, and the DNS section should be more intuitive."
"I think the most important thing is that it should be easily accessible, but currently, that doesn't seem to be the case. We need a hardware platform that's based on common standards and open computing principles, which would be like a commodity and benefit us greatly."
"There should be more technical documentation."
"The pricing could be improved. It is definitely one of the more expensive products."
"We would like to see granular notification settings and more advanced filtering in traffic monitoring."
"It's sometimes not easy to understand and can require specialist assistance."
"They are working on cloud-based options. However, they do not have the options fully functional in their solution at this time."
"Cloud-based central administration of all devices from one point would be nice"
"The way Secure Sign-On authentication is happening needs to be improved. When the Secure Sign-On portal is turned on, anybody who comes into the campus, whether he or she is a staff member or a guest, has to go past the initial portal. One of the shortcomings is the username. It shouldn't allow permutations or combinations with upper or lower cases. For example, when there is a username abc, it shouldn't allow ABC or Abc. It should not allow the same username, but currently, two separate people can go in. Therefore, its authentication or validation should be improved, and the case sensitiveness should be picked up. If I have restricted someone to two devices, they shouldn't be able to use different combinations of the same username and get into the third or fourth device. It shouldn't allow different combinations of alphabets to be used to log in."
"The area where I think this product can be improved is the user interface and the reporting. It can be quite difficult to find the correct logs and to actually find out what is going on. The digging can be time-consuming."
"Sometimes I would like to copy a rule set from one box to another box in a direct way. This is a feature that is not present at the moment in WatchGuard."
OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews while WatchGuard Firebox is ranked 13th in Firewalls with 79 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while WatchGuard Firebox is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Robust network security and management offering a user-friendly interface, open-source flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, with challenges regarding initial setup and the absence of official support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Firebox writes "Offers a streamlined deployment, intuitive interface and robust security features". OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and Cisco Secure Firewall, whereas WatchGuard Firebox is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ, Meraki MX and Cisco Secure Firewall. See our OPNsense vs. WatchGuard Firebox report.
See our list of best Firewalls 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.
