We performed a comparison between Citrix SD-WAN and Steelhead based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two WAN Optimization solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Citrix SD-WAN is customization. You are able to customize the solution to your needs."
"The solution is brilliant, the way it calculates its paths and trails is great."
"The best feature is the backup capability, where all of the users' computers are tied into a central data repository."
"The SD-WAN solution as it is already is quite feature-rich and the upgrade process is very simple."
"It allows us to use additional VPNs, offering more options compared to other VPN solutions."
"We are using it widely for the local record for SaaS-based applications. Another valuable feature is a local breakout."
"The VPN and the load balancing are the most valuable features."
"The stability is the main feature of Citrix SD-WAN. You can also upgrade the data packages or have less transmission."
"SteelHead works from the application. I use it to optimize traffic from Amazon. It is mainly used for customers who need to increase the traffic to 33K. For other users, it has been more of an operation."
"I find the most valuable to be the compression and exchange replication."
"One of our most valuable features is Steelhead's cloud migration optimization. Moving to the cloud helped optimize our workflow, improving performance for end-users."
"Steelhead is stable, and it can even help you avoid service interruption in the event of a power outage. If your hardware fails, technical support will replace your device quickly."
"It is very easy to install the solution."
"Scalable data referencing is a great feature."
"The connectivity to speed is the valuable feature."
"The compression of Riverbed is very powerful. It can also handle large quantities of traffic."
"The reports need to be improved. We need to have them customized but they don't have that right now. I would like for them to have better system predictions. We don't have that right now. My system may be working fine right now but after making some changes, that can change."
"The price could be improved, it's an expensive solution."
"There are a few things that can be improved, are domain-based routing and the slowness of virtual parts, and it may be due to the wrong configuration, which we have been unable to find out."
"I would like to see support for additional reporting."
"The initial setup could be a bit easier."
"The only improvement for Citrix SD-WAN would be to lower its cost."
"Given that Citrix SD-WAN solved all our problems by providing us with everything we needed to unify communications with our branches and data centers, I cannot suggest anything further in terms of improvements."
"Overall, network security and next-generation firewall features are areas that they can improve on."
"The product should offer more integration capabilities."
"I would like to see improvement in the solution’s configuration and protocol aspects. We have got some configurations that are not set. I would also like to simplify the call detection of some protocols."
"They should include a network switch in a future release."
"The application response time of the solution can be improved."
"If we load a primary firewall, the secondary firewall usually handles all the active connections, but in Riverbed, this isn't the case. We lose all the active connections at the moment of failure."
"Application response time and network performance could be improved."
"The product needs improvement in its integration with SDN."
"Steelhead's handling of encrypted traffic could be improved because it requires some complex configuration to optimize encrypted traffic, especially when working with Microsoft protocols for mail servers and VPN services"
Citrix SD-WAN is ranked 4th in WAN Optimization with 21 reviews while Steelhead is ranked 3rd in WAN Optimization with 23 reviews. Citrix SD-WAN is rated 8.2, while Steelhead is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Citrix SD-WAN writes " A scalable solution for MCN controller but lacks technical supports, upgrades". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Steelhead writes "Exceptionally stable and reliable but costly". Citrix SD-WAN is most compared with Cisco SD-WAN, Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki SD-WAN, Cato SASE Cloud Platform and Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform, whereas Steelhead is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform, Noction IRP, WAAS and Cisco SD-WAN. See our Citrix SD-WAN vs. Steelhead report.
See our list of best WAN Optimization vendors and best WAN Edge vendors.
We monitor all WAN Optimization 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.