We performed a comparison between Sangfor NGAF 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."Offers good security and filtering."
"Initial setup is straightforward. There weren't too many issues with setting it up. It takes one hour or so."
"A strong point of FortiGate is the graphical interface is complete and easy to use."
"It's very easy to set up, it's very easy to make policies and, for an organization, that means you don't need IT expert in firewalls. You just need to have somebody who knows a little bit of IT, and that's it. With other products, you need someone with a "Masters" degree in firewalls."
"Security, SD-WAN, and Streetscape are valuable features."
"The multi-tenancy feature is most valuable. It integrates very well with FortiManager and FortiAnalyzer."
"Fortinet FortiGate is scalable for our users. Right now, we have almost 70 users. We do not have any plan to increase our usage of FortiGate. For maintaining the firewall solution, one staff member is enough."
"It is easy to use. We chose this product for the possibility to have virtual domains (VDOMs). We are building another company in the group, and we would like to split the firewalling rules and policies between these two companies. Each company would be able to manage its own policies and security rules, which is an advantage of Fortinet FortiGate. We can define VDOMs, and every company can manage its own VDOM as if it has its own physical firewall, but in fact, we would be using the same physical appliance because we are also using the same internet lines. So, it allows us to reuse the existing resources without the disadvantage of having to compromise on policies and security. Each company can choose its own way of working."
"The most valuable features are the WAN optimization, the internet access gateway (IAG), and the central console, which allows us to implement on their firewall."
"Sangfor is a good solution that provides a WAF and firewall solution. Most other vendors, like Sophos and Fortinet and Cisco, only provide one solution. That's a valuable feature of Sangfor."
"So far, the performance and reliability of the product have supported our company's critical network traffic."
"Sangfor NGAF's standout feature is its powerful application control, enabling precise restrictions on mobile user access to approved applications."
"It is a stable solution."
"It seems to be a durable, stable product."
"The price versus value is good because the solution is less expensive than Sophos, Fortinet, or SonicWall."
"Sangfor has the best capabilities for securing connections, securing web browsers, securing servers, and general threat protection."
"The client is easy to use and stable"
"It's pretty simple to use. It's pretty simple to understand, and there's plenty of documentation. It does a pretty good job of what it is meant to do."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It provides us with Layer 2 and Layer 3 security."
"The product's usability is good. It is straightforward and simple. One of the benefits is that it is easy to navigate and intuitive."
"It's very easy to use, especially compared to similar products. A lot more users use the WatchGuard appliance now than use the SonicWall appliance because of the ease of usability."
"WebBlocker has the best URL category database ever."
"Firebox operates effectively in the background, blocking potential threats without a need for constant monitoring."
"Scalability for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be improved. SD-WAN security for this solution also needs some improvement."
"The initial setup is complex."
"As far as wanting more scalability or things in the network diagram, it's going to cost you."
"The scalability could be better."
"I use the FortiGate 60D model and realized the 300Mbps bandwidth limitation. Because it is a product that offers many services, I think it could have greater bandwidth capacity."
"The customization could be improved. Cisco, for example, is much better at this. They need to work to be at least as good as they are."
"Fortigate's hardware capacities could be improved."
"It would be ideal if they had some sort of GUI interface for troubleshooting and diagnostics."
"The support for YouTube or the Internet is not enough."
"An area of improvement for Sangfor NGAF could be in the field of reporting and logging."
"Occasional issues with breaches which are dealt with expediently."
"The setup phase is quite complex."
"Lacks consistency in terms of filtering certain websites and applications."
"It does not offer any recommendations on how to mitigate or control attacks."
"There is room for improvement in dependency on certain infrastructure, like the DNS dependency on the current DNS server that the company has. It should be standalone. It should not depend on any other DNS server."
"They need to improve their research team and they need to study their data to analyze it and build the product."
"The UI and web view aren't nice."
"The reporting is a little on the weak side. I would like to see a better reporting set and easier drill-down options."
"There's always room for improvement, especially if the threats are getting more sophisticated and the IT department cannot sufficiently meet this kind of sophistication with their own knowledge and experience. Knowing that this solution can get up to the level of addressing a lot of these threats is something that everybody wishes for. If we look at the dark web and the lawful web, they are two opposites, and if these two good and bad collide in the world of the internet, you want the best possible product—especially if you cannot get to that point of knowledge. I am just an individual and end user, with limited knowledge of usage. That's why I say there's always room for improvement, from their side and also from mine, because by knowing exactly what they can achieve and the knowledge that they can get on an everyday basis, and the portion that is understandable to me, it's an improvement for them as well."
"The solution's pricing could be improved."
"I would like to see more tutorials on setting up the Firebox."
"The user interface for WatchGuard Firebox has room for improvement. Right now, it's a bit complex to work with and could be easier."
"When working with WatchGuard, specifically in configuring Panda Security on the portal for the first time, it was challenging for me."
"The only downside is that it is missing an API, that you can use to easily collect information from it."
Sangfor NGAF is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 31 reviews while WatchGuard Firebox is ranked 13th in Firewalls with 79 reviews. Sangfor NGAF is rated 8.0, while WatchGuard Firebox is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Sangfor NGAF writes "Affordable, easy to configure firewall with fast, responsive support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Firebox writes "Offers a streamlined deployment, intuitive interface and robust security features". Sangfor NGAF is most compared with Sophos XG, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Netgate pfSense, Check Point NGFW and Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall, whereas WatchGuard Firebox is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, OPNsense, SonicWall TZ and Meraki MX. See our Sangfor NGAF 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.
