We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] and Fortinet FortiMail based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, TitanHQ and others in Email Security."The initial setup is straightforward. You just add the license, click it, and then you can set up the rules. It is quite simple."
"It gives us visibility into threats and, for endpoints, it helps us to prioritize threats. We used to have a lack of visibility, but now our time to detect and respond has decreased."
"The deployment capability is a great feature."
"The solution is very easy to use. All you have to do is to assign the license to the end-user and it's done. The customer will only have the feature activated, and the solution will monitor the emails to determine if they are a threat or not."
"Some of the valuable features on the email side are anti-phishing, anti-malware, and Safe Links."
"The most valuable feature is the integration. It's a single console, so we don't have to switch around between multiple products. Another valuable feature is the ease of operations and maintenance."
"Defender enables us to secure all 365-related activity from a single place. It gives us visibility into everything happening in Outlook, protecting us against phishing and other email-based threats. Defender helps us detect any suspicious behaviors."
"The most valuable feature is protection against malicious links, fishing, and impersonation. You can train people to be aware of these threats, but they're not always careful. When they're using their phones between meetings, they click on a link, and it's game over."
"The filtering of the solution is very good. You can do URL filtering and, while you need a custom URL to filter under other solutions like Symantec, here the solution covers most categories and the database."
"Unlike other competitors, it doesn't cause any performance issues."
"It is good at data leakage prevention (DLP). You can create the data exfiltration profile while sending the emails, which is one of the key advantages of the solution."
"Using Forcepoint, we have created policies and rules for any suspicious mail. It is blocked and only released by an admin's approval."
"It's easier to deploy than other options."
"I like how versatile the options are. For example, we can set it where we are able to access and browse Facebook but we are denied the ability to post photos. There is also that ability integrate with Office 365 - SharePoint app."
"The email and the web filter aspects of the solution are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features of Forcepoint Email Security are the integration with other solutions. It provides a more secure infrastructure and views for the customers from the DLP. You can work on URLs, files, and advanced inspections that will protect the customers."
"Fortinet FortiMail's most valuable features are its performance and security."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The solution is very reliable and very stable."
"Its performance is very good and it is stable."
"The spam filtering is great."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiMail is its fully detailed dashboard."
"Fortinet FortiMail's most valuable features are antispam, antivirus, database, and data loss prevention (DLP)."
"The antiphishing capabilities are very good."
"The custom alerts have to improve a lot."
"It would be better if it were more scalable. It depends on the architecture, but we would like to make it more scalable for both data centers."
"This product's effectiveness could be improved, in terms of detecting unwanted spam or even malware between the emails, compared to other products."
"One area for improvement is integration. For example, when it comes to external SaaS platforms, we were not able to get a lot of information on integrations with such apps for security and authentication."
"The only thing they should improve is the licensing model. They should stop changing it. A year ago, the five features I mentioned were included in one product. Now, three of them are bundled into one product, and you have to pay extra for the other two. I don't mind paying extra, but I don't want them to change it every year or every six months. I need to know what I'm looking at and not worry about it next year."
"The company should focus on adding threats that the solution is currently unable to detect."
"About eight months ago, we started to measure the quantity of phishing and spam that we have been receiving, and it has been increasing a lot. That means that protection for our email is not as good as we were expecting."
"The phishing and spam filters could use some improvement."
"The reporting functionality needs to be improved, as it is not customizable."
"Technical support is lacking. It could be a lot better."
"Forcepoint is the best for DLP, but it is not better than other solutions in terms of phishing emails or threat protections on the email. It has less visibility over there. They might need to enhance these components because other solutions, such as Cisco Email Security and IronPort, have more advanced features. Forcepoint should focus more on threats and spam. They have a small database for spam. They must increase their solution's capability from this perspective."
"An area for improvement in Forcepoint Email Security is technical support. The agents need to be more knowledgeable. The support also needs to be faster."
"We've fixed a couple of issues on the solution so far. It doesn't work perfectly all the time."
"It's quite difficult to learn this solution, it's not an entry level product. If you are a skilled user you will think it's a very useful tool, but if you are not a skilled user, you'll think it is very difficult to learn."
"Forcepoint Email Security is stable, but it could be improved."
"Customer support could be better."
"The support could be faster because we've been receiving complaints from customers, they say that when they raise a ticket, it doesn't take 24 hours to respond, sometimes the support responds after three days. This is a lot of time."
"The statistics and BI in general could be improved."
"In the Latin America market, some spam messages use Portuguese language. Some clearly spam messages would be better identified by the anti-spam if not for the language."
"Online support sometimes takes up to a week to get back to you."
"The solution's pricing is flexible and can be adjusted for African utility companies. Microsoft often offers special pricing formulas for African governments and organizations and it is similar to Fortinet FortiMail. In my country, government institutions receive discounted pricing from Fortinet FortiMail."
"The product's cybersecurity features could be better."
"The product should work on licensing and provide more detail once the license is selected for the customer."
"Fortinet FortiMail's pricing could be improved."
More Microsoft Defender for Office 365 Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Email Security with 14 reviews while Fortinet FortiMail is ranked 5th in Email Security with 57 reviews. Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] is rated 7.8, while Fortinet FortiMail is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] writes "Easy to use and setup and expands well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiMail writes "Good GUI and configuring security policies is easy but the pricing needs improvement". Forcepoint Email Security [EOL] is most compared with Proofpoint Email Protection, whereas Fortinet FortiMail is most compared with Cisco Secure Email, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Barracuda Email Security Gateway, Proofpoint Email Protection and Fortinet FortiMail Cloud.
See our list of best Email Security vendors.
We monitor all Email Security 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.