We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiClient and Perimeter 81 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Infrastructure VPN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"The solution has good performance."
"Fortinet FortiClient offers a vulnerability test feature, allowing us to monitor end-user devices. This includes ensuring necessary updates, such as Windows updates, are not overlooked."
"This is a solid and stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiClient is dual authentication and the VPN is secure."
"What I find valuable in FortiClient is its patch management capabilities, allowing remote updates efficiently."
"It's very stable."
"From my perspective as an end user, it's consistently stable, and I would rate the stability as a nine out of ten."
"The solution offers great stability."
"Fortinet FortiClient is easy to use, and the single-access managed login is pretty good."
"Their split tunneling feature has been very valuable to our company since implementing the Perimeter 81 solution."
"Providing access and security allows our company employees to work from home and remotely."
"Scaling Perimeter 81 was easy to do."
"The feature that I have found to be most valuable is the reputation that the company has regarding privacy. Nowadays, this is critical, especially when you do all of your work online."
"Our operators can work from home without any problems."
"It helps to quickly get access to the pages I need."
"Perimeter 81 has increased my security and privacy while maintaining solid internet performance."
"Logging back into Perimeter 81 is relatively user-friendly as I just need to re-type my Windows credentials in to access the VPN."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"It would be nice to see more in hand features in terms of the DLP, so that the solution can be integrated with the DLP, as well as more reporting features on the end point."
"While we like patch management, it would be nice if it could handle patch management for other solutions, like Microsoft."
"The user interface on the central server could be improved."
"I think that FortiClient can enhance the multifactor authentication."
"It would be extremely useful to have an automatic updating feature."
"Its stability can be improved. It is not as reliable as I would like it to be. There are times when things don't work quite right. Our biggest pain point is not related to Fortinet FortiClient and the whole scheme of things. It is related to one of the additional services called FortiGuard. They are the arm that does all of the updates to definitions, keeps all the signatures updated, and responds to new threats and whatnot. What we have found is that they react quickly, but sometimes their solutions aren't compatible with all of the components of the Fortinet security suite, specifically around FortiSandbox."
"The solution could be more secure. I would like to see more safety features."
"We've got one client where it was blocking the smartphones, and there's a way to set it up on Fortigate that's supposed to do that. However, it didn't work with them since they had a 2FA multi-factor."
"One of our challenges is ensuring the security of our cloud-based operations."
"Its initial setup process is complex for a hybrid environment."
"I'd love to learn more about all of the features. Maybe a monthly spotlight of features or having a banner that explains more ways certain features could be used would be helpful."
"If I were to be nitpicky, I would ask that Perimeter 81 offer the option for us to change the color of the graphical user interface, like maybe pink or green or so on."
"A Google Chrome extension would be handy instead of logging into the app."
"Offering in-app explanations detailing what each feature does, its benefits and potential use cases can help users better understand and utilize the tool to its full potential."
"There are a few areas where the solution could be improved. For instance, we sometimes encounter connectivity issues, which can be problematic. Recently, I experienced a connectivity issue while trying to move to Azure. Connectivity issues can be quite frustrating."
"There is a very small amount of downtime."
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 85 reviews while Perimeter 81 is ranked 8th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 22 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Perimeter 81 writes "Great SAML and SCIM support with the ability to deploy site-2-site tunnels with specific IP restrictions". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, whereas Perimeter 81 is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cloudflare Access and Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Perimeter 81 report.
See our list of best Enterprise Infrastructure VPN vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.
