We performed a comparison between OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks PA-Series 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 most valuable features are simplicity, management, and that it's constantly evolving."
"It has very easy management and an amazing ETM configuration."
"This solution has helped our organization by having strong functions and a reliable firewall."
"Good load balancing feature."
"Fortinet FortiGate is stable. It's used across all the countries, this is the way most multinationals run their system."
"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."
"SSL-VPN is very useful for us and has been very reliable."
"Web filtering and two-factor authentication are great features."
"The IDS and IPS features are valuable. From the usability perspective, there is a lot of good documentation. As IT professionals, we found it very easy to configure the firewall. It was easy to configure and use."
"OPNsense is highly stable."
"What I like the most about OPNsense is that it offers an easy-to-use dashboard for device management and control."
"We have been operating here in our lab for several months, and everything appears to be extremely stable."
"It has an open license. It works very well, and there is an update every month."
"The system in general is quite flexible."
"The initial setup is easy. It only takes 15-30 minutes to deploy."
"It is a very good solution. I like the dashboard. I can see what is going on and manage it as I like it."
"The tool's most valuable feature is WildFire."
"The solution provides good customer support."
"App-ID is a really good feature."
"The most effective features for threat prevention in the PA-Series are its integration with Cortex and the use of machine learning AI for advanced threat detection."
"It has its own logging system. You can go to monitoring and check the logs to see if a connection is getting blocked. You can use multiple types of logs to check if a file or a port is getting blocked or if there are any TCP resets from the source or destination. It's easy to troubleshoot with the monitoring and logging it provides."
"The solution is robust."
"The direct profiles is a valuable feature."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The solution needs to improve its integration with cybersecurity."
"I would like to see improvements made to the dashboard and UI, as well as to the reporting."
"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."
"Monitoring and reporting could be better."
"We have an issue with hotel guest vouchers."
"The pricing could be a bit better, especially when you consider how they have the most basic offering priced."
"FortiOS is not simple."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding enhancements to FortiMail, FortiSOAR, and FortiDeceptor."
"The interface of the solution is an area with shortcomings."
"There are issues with stability and reliability."
"The solution would not be suitable for anything large-scale."
"The reporting part could be better."
"We did not like the fact that you have to configure everything with the graphic user interface. We have used other firewalls, such as FortiGate, that you can configure via code. OPNsense is not easy to integrate. When you are deploying via GitHub or another source repository, this is not possible. That's one thing we didn't like much."
"I would like to see better SD-WAN performance."
"I would like better documentation concerning the provided packages and their integration."
"You will need additional training before you can actually start to use it."
"The support provided by the solution is not that good."
"There are constant updates for the operating system. It is a nice thing also, but it has its own disadvantages. Continuous updates are there. The users face issues like, how often do I need to update that? Within a period of five months, I'm updating it two or three times. It gives them a feeling that they are not confident about their product and have to update it so frequently."
"Pricing flexibility could be an aspect worth considering, as it has been a concern for some of our clients."
"The web interface is slow."
"The product's gateway services can be improved."
"The solution's licensing price could be improved."
"I encountered a slight issue with the application portal, which was not functioning correctly."
"The pricing of the solution needs improvement."
OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews while Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is ranked 16th in Firewalls with 28 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is rated 8.6. 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 Palo Alto Networks PA-Series writes "Offers trained customer support, stability and ease of use ". OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM and IPFire, whereas Palo Alto Networks PA-Series is most compared with SonicWall NSa, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense and WatchGuard Firebox. See our OPNsense vs. Palo Alto Networks PA-Series 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.