We performed a comparison between Citrix SD-WAN and Prisma SD-WAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is security, as it gives me the port bindings that cannot be accomplished using other solutions."
"The best feature is the backup capability, where all of the users' computers are tied into a central data repository."
"The main advantage of Citrix SD-WAN is that it enables fast communication between our branches and data centers. And, with its cloud management features, it also makes the process of adding new branches into our company network much easier."
"The zero-touch deployment is most valuable for us."
"The scalability and stability are quite good in general."
"The solution is brilliant, the way it calculates its paths and trails is great."
"The stability is the main feature of Citrix SD-WAN. You can also upgrade the data packages or have less transmission."
"The most valuable feature of Citrix SD-WAN is customization. You are able to customize the solution to your needs."
"Prisma supports all of the applications we're currently using."
"I like the link monitoring and analytics. These are the features that set Prisma apart from other products. Prisma works well with large, complex networks. One of my clients is a top bank in the United States, and Prisma has performed well for that customer."
"If the MPLS goes down, there is a really smooth transition for a branch site to take traffic over the Internet. It will advertise the routes of that site in a jiffy."
"The security offered by the solution is pretty good."
"I like that the integration with Palo Alto is easy."
"It is flexible to use the internet connection via local breakouts without going to data centers."
"From the main controller, we can administer the customer's devices, QoS, network, and traffic. We can monitor it and we can change and create policies as well as upgrade the software. We can totally control a customer's network from one site, the Prisma SD-WAN portal."
"The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"The price is the only thing that could be improved. Citrix is not a cheap solution."
"The firewall reporting could be easier to use and filter. (It works well enough, but if I need to give an area for improvement, I think this would be it.). The built-in reporting on the product in this regard is not great."
"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."
"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."
"Citrix should continue to offer a perpetual licensing model because it is very important to us."
"The price could be improved, it's an expensive solution."
"Overall, network security and next-generation firewall features are areas that they can improve on."
"I am happy with this product. If anything, its price can be reduced. It is a bit expensive."
"Customer support is our biggest pain point. The quality of support has gone down a little since we initially deployed this product. I don't know if this is due to turnover at Palo Alto or a lack of training. It is now taking one or two days to get an initial response that says, "Hey, we've looked into this, can you pull this data for us?" In the past, we'd immediately get a response."
"We are incorporating their zone-based firewalls. Prisma SD-WAN has limited documentation on how it manipulates traffic, e.g., how it is interacting with TCP and UDP. We recently had some traffic that was black holing. We literally had to do packet captures to see that the new zone-based firewall, which runs on top of Prisma SD-WAN, was causing issues."
"There are two parallel things that we want Palo Alto to work on. First, customers want a unified appliance that does the work of all firewalls in addition to SD-WAN. Second, the cloud presence should be completely automated. If I purchase the SASE architecture, I shouldn't worry about deployments in Prisma Access or on Prisma SD-WAN. It should be deployed in one go."
"Prisma SD-WAN's technical support should be improved."
"Sometimes, during the product's initial setup phase, bypass pair or couple ports don't come up normally, and it requires an hour and a half to troubleshoot to reset the box from Prisma SD-WAN to factory default."
"Prisma could be a little cheaper."
"The only con is the pricing because it's more premium."
"The tool needs to work on price and complexity."
Citrix SD-WAN is ranked 9th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 21 reviews while Prisma SD-WAN is ranked 7th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 12 reviews. Citrix SD-WAN is rated 8.2, while Prisma SD-WAN is rated 8.6. 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 Prisma SD-WAN writes "A stable tool that offers a good uptime and ensures a return on investment". Citrix SD-WAN is most compared with Cisco SD-WAN, Fortinet FortiGate, Steelhead, Meraki SD-WAN and Cato SASE Cloud Platform, whereas Prisma SD-WAN is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cisco SD-WAN, Meraki SD-WAN, Fortinet FortiGate and Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform. See our Citrix SD-WAN vs. Prisma SD-WAN report.
See our list of best Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions vendors and best WAN Edge vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions 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.
