We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiClient and Fortinet FortiNAC based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"This is stable and scalable."
"We have FortiEDR installed on all our systems. This protects them from any threats."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"Installation was easy."
"FortiClient's most valuable features are that it's fast and safe."
"FortiClient is very easy, useful, and practical."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiClient are ease of use and simple configuration."
"FortiClient has good signatures, good protection and, up until recently, it integrated really well with our firewall."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiClient is dual authentication and the VPN is secure."
"The integration of VPN services with endpoint security is valuable."
"It is a scalable product."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiNAC are user device management and there are plenty of policies."
"The interface is good and simple to use."
"Provides good performance, is easy to use and configure."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is having visibility over the IoT devices on the network."
"Fortinet FortiNAC offers several valuable features, including data security, 99 percent uptime with VPN connections, MAC filtering, and traffic prioritization."
"I like FortiNAC's integration with other Fortinet devices. They work together well, but the solution also works with other network devices."
"The support responds to our queries within two to four hours."
"The tool provides us with a list of devices that tries to connect to our network. It offers us a lot of network visibility."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"The support needs improvement."
"Detections could be improved."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"The SIEM could be improved."
"The documentation could be improved."
"We do not use the solution every day and there are times when the new users have trouble reconnecting. The technology itself works but our users getting adopted to it is a major problem. Having the user adapt to the desktop landing page that it begins on is throwing them off a bit."
"The user interface on the central server could be improved."
"The connectivity could be improved."
"FortiClient is not communicating with the new version of the firewall."
"We'd like to be able to properly encrypt the data more effectively."
"Fortinet FortiClient could improve the compatibility with mobile applications that are allowed and sometimes they do not respond. However, Microsoft Windows applications are very good."
"The price could also use improvement."
"Admin UI could be better matched and easier to use; it cannot work as a RADIUS server."
"There could be better integration with legacy equipment. It integrates perfectly with all Fortinet solutions, but if you look at other third-party integrations—not on the networking part; but more on the security infrastructure part—it's more limited."
"The response and resolution time for technical support issues need to be improved."
"They need to change or upgrade the technology in the product."
"I would like to be able to compare the configuration backup before and after."
"The solution's licensing price should be improved."
"The product must make its UI similar to other Fortinet products."
"I think the network devices need to give more information."
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 86 reviews while Fortinet FortiNAC is ranked 4th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 43 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Fortinet FortiNAC is rated 7.6. 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 Fortinet FortiNAC writes "I like the solution's native integration with other devices from the same vendor". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Check Point Remote Access VPN, whereas Fortinet FortiNAC is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Forescout Platform, Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Portnox CORE. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Fortinet FortiNAC report.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.