We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiGate-VM and Palo Alto Networks VM-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."This solution has helped our organization by having strong functions and a reliable firewall."
"The most valuable feature is the web filter."
"The most valuable features are the possibility of having one fabric for switching on security."
"The solution is very user friendly. The user interface in particular is quite nice."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of configuration."
"The stability and scalability of this solution are satisfactory. Its SD-WAN, VPN, and URL filtering features are very useful."
"Initial setup is straightforward. There weren't too many issues with setting it up. It takes one hour or so."
"It has improved our organization with control data."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the integration within the environment, with centralized reporting."
"The initial setup is very user-friendly."
"The ROI is good since I get free support."
"The most valuable features are the IPS and Antivirus."
"The most valuables features are the ease of use and deployment."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate-VM are the ease of use, IPS system, application filter, web filtering, and email security. Additionally, there is a migration tool that other vendors do not provide. We only need to upload the configuration file to the tool, and it converts everything, except the passwords, and gives us the new configuration, which we can directly upload on the firewall. This migration process takes a maximum of 15 minutes."
"The most valuable feature is the WAN optimization."
"The dashboards are a good feature."
"I have not actually called their support line, because we have a direct contact to a senior engineer in the company for any issues that we handle with them. I will say they are very responsive, and they do give you the information you need when you need it."
"In Palo Alto the most important feature is the App-ID."
"The solution enables organizations to enforce policies."
"Using Palo Alto Networks Panorama, we were able to deploy a single point of management and visualization of the firewall infrastructure in cloud, on-premise and integrated with Azure to automate scale up. Its security features, i.e. anti-malware, threat prevention, URL Filtering, VPN, and antivirus are the most valuable. The ID-User integrated with AD and 2FA features are also very useful to provide secure access to servers and some users in the company. "
"The most valuable features are security and support."
"With the improved visibility we now have, the traffic is being properly monitored, which means that we are better able to manage it. These are improvements that we saw very quickly."
"The interface with Panorama makes it very easy to use."
"It is an easy-to-scale product."
"FortiLink is the interface on the firewall that allows you to extend switch management across all of your switches in the network. The problem with it is that you can't use multiple interfaces unless you set them up in a lag. Only then you can run them. So, it forces you to use a core type of switch to propagate that management out to the rest of the switches, and then it is running the case at 200. It leaves you with 18 ports on the firewall because it is also a layer-three router that could also be used as a switch, but as soon as you do that, you can't really use them. They could do a little bit more clean up in the way the stacking interface works. Some use cases and the documentation on the FortiLink checking interface are a little outdated. I can find stuff on version 5 or more, but it is hard to find information on some of the newer firmware. The biggest thing I would like to see is some improvement in the switch management feature. I would like to be able to relegate some of the ports, which are on the firewall itself, to act as a switch to take advantage of those ports. Some of these firewalls have clarity ports on them. If I can use those, it would mean that I need to buy two less switches, which saves time. I get why they don't, but I would still like to see it because it would save a little bit of space in the server rack."
"The feedback that I have received is that the performance could be better, and the user experience is not as good compared to a previous solution we used. It could be more user-friendly. Of course, it still works fine for our operations."
"The logs need to be better. They need to be more visible and easier to access."
"Maybe they could make some features more accessible, such as a way to translate directions between two networks that share the same subnets."
"Some features of Fortinet FortiGate are actually fee enabled that are inconvenient for deploying in production. Other issues relate to isolation with Cisco products and your server."
"Currently, without the additional reporting module, we only have access to basic reporting."
"One of the features that I would like to have is to do with endpoint production, it should be integrated. For example, the firewall gets notified of any kind of forensic event that needs to be done, such as if there is a ransomware attack and how it originated, all those records have to be available from the firewall, which is not."
"The platform's interface could improve."
"We have had some stability issues."
"The stability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"One thing that can be better is added automation. And, on top of that, enhanced security when it comes to the automation itself."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"The log settings and filters could use some improvement."
"The reporting is not as good as it is with other firewalls and it should be improved."
"The users must buy FortiSIEM to get advanced analytics."
"There were challenges during setup, and many of them were self-inflicted."
"There could be dynamic DNS features similar to Fortinet in the product."
"Its web interface is a bit outdated, and it needs to be updated. They can also improve the NAT functionality. We have had issues with the NAT setup."
"The user interface could use some improvement."
"Palo Alto is that it is really bad when it comes to technical support."
"The solution needs to have more easily searchable details or documentation about it online, so it's easier to Google if you have queries."
"The tool is very costly."
"It can definitely improve on the performance."
"It has to be more scalable for the deployment of VMs on the cloud."
Fortinet FortiGate-VM is ranked 9th in Firewalls with 113 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 53 reviews. Fortinet FortiGate-VM is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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 VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Fortinet FortiGate-VM is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiOS, OPNsense, Cisco Secure Firewall and Netgate pfSense, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Huawei NGFW. See our Fortinet FortiGate-VM vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-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.
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