We performed a comparison between Check Point NGFW and Meraki MX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Unified Threat Management (UTM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Fortigate's most valuable feature is that it doesn't need a push policy when writing rules."
"Centralized monitoring, policy management, and virtualized appliances allow us to take control over our public and private infrastructure."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are remote access, web filtering, and IPS."
"It is user friendly, and has all the features you need."
"The stability and scalability of this solution are satisfactory. Its SD-WAN, VPN, and URL filtering features are very useful."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ease of use and the UI. It has always provided me with what I needed. I have no need for additional costs that other solutions have, such as Sophos."
"What's most important is the ease of use."
"I am "headache free" that I don't have to categorize all the websites and that security has been pre categorized by the people, and that the services are getting updated. At least one part of my problem is over."
"The failover from one device to the other has been seamless and we find that we do not lose ongoing SIP calls or Teams chats."
"As with any firewall, IPSEC VPN is the critical functionality. Not every organization has the budget to implement MPLS or SD-WAN, which makes IPSEC the go-to for site-to-site connectivity."
"Log storage gives us insights when required."
"The separate management feature of Check Point NGFW is very convenient."
"It excels in malware prevention, utilizing features like fan black pattern and vulnerability-driven detection, ensuring comprehensive security against evolving threats."
"Its most significant strength lies in its superior threat detection engines."
"The tool provides great security."
"While not being cheap, their pricing models are competitive."
"It is very easy to use and manage. It is also very easy to scale."
"The most valuable feature of Meraki MX is I can manage the solution from anywhere remotely, I can throttle bandwidth, and create all rules. Additionally, it is secure for our customers."
"It's flexible, easy to configure, and easy to manage."
"It is a robust SD-WAN solution."
"The features we have found most valuable are the firewall and the monitoring tools."
"When you try to create an IP or when you have an alert about when a website is banned, these features are helpful."
"What I like best about Meraki MX is that it's easy to deploy remotely. The product works. It has automatic updates. I also like that Meraki MX is a brilliant device. You turn it on, stick the key in there, activate it, and then you're done. Meraki MX does what my customers need at the end of the day, so I also like that."
"It is very easy to configure."
"There is room for improvement related to the logging and reporting aspect."
"The license renewal process, annual renewal price, and the web application firewall features should be improved."
"A sandbox would be good in order to be able to inspect the emails containing spam and be able to validate the emails that contain malware, prior to delivering to the customer."
"It can be a little bit more user-friendly in terms of policy definition and implementation. It seems a little bit complicated, and it could be simplified."
"They should improve the interface to make it more user-friendly."
"This product needs to have an analysis feature, rather than having the analysis done through the integration of a different product."
"The web-cache feature which was previously on the FortiGate device, but was deleted with the recent upgrade should be returned. It was a very valuable feature for us."
"One of the problems I was having was with user mapping, and it is an issue for which I have escalated tickets with Fortinet support."
"There is a strong demand for security services that can be effortlessly integrated which would ensure that security measures can seamlessly adapt to the cloud infrastructure."
"The interface can be more user-friendly in terms of design and the location of critical and commonly used icons."
"It would help if they were easier to deploy, without needing more technical people. It would be nice if we could just give basic information, how to connect, and that would be all, while the rest of the setup could be done remotely."
"Internet load balancing provides either active/passive or active/active load balancing, however, I would like to see more options that provide SD-WAN capabilities while also allowing for more than two links."
"The frequency of the antivirus updates which we get for Check Point firewalls should increase. They should be of good quality compared to the competitive firewalls on the market. They should give us stable antivirus signatures. That is an area in which they can improve."
"The upgrade is something we would like to be improved in the future as the frequency of hotfixes is too much, and by the time we finish the one round, we already have the new version released and are required to upgrade."
"Log queries are slow and take time to load."
"The network automation and security automation could be better."
"MX can only be managed via a web interface, but I'm accustomed to using a CLI or a graphical interface. I would also like to see more reporting features. It doesn't provide enough information for me to know precisely about some clients."
"I need more UTM protection security features."
"Expensive licensing and firewall stops immediately working if the license is not renewed at expiration date."
"When we do API integrations with Meraki, they have always been hard as well as tedious to build. The data that we want out of the API integrations has been only recently available. Six months ago, it was hard to get someone to build something correctly or useful with Meraki APIs. Recently, they have made more data available on the API, but it is just a start. They need to do more."
"The product is quite complex to set up."
"Pricing is an area where the solution lacks since it is an expensive tool."
"We can’t access GUI management and CLI opening features when the Internet is unavailable."
"Direct logging is something that can be introduced. In the absence of cloud management, the possibility of local configurations and on-premise logins becomes restricted. This limitation stands as a primary concern. When it comes to resolving issues, the inability to access login options hampers troubleshooting efforts. The stability is noteworthy; but when compared to alternative products, its stability is comparatively lower. Additionally, certain limitations are observed in terms of remote control. Price-wise, the solution stands out for its competitive and cost-effective nature compared to other alternatives. Operationally, it is user-friendly and requires minimal effort from administrators, making configuration hassle-free."
Check Point NGFW doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 276 reviews while Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 58 reviews. Check Point NGFW is rated 8.8, while Meraki MX is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point NGFW writes "Good antivirus protection and URL filtering with very good user identification capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". Check Point NGFW is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense and WatchGuard Firebox, whereas Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Juniper SRX Series Firewall. See our Check Point NGFW vs. Meraki MX report.
See our list of best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors and best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Unified Threat Management (UTM) 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.