We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiOS and Meraki MX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's a user-friendly firewall. Most of the tasks are very simple. It's simple to configure and troubleshoot this firewall."
"The technical support is great."
"We can use our devices to check all of the perimeters. It secures email websites."
"The base firewall features are quite valuable to us."
"The product is easy to use and is stable. The SV1 functionality is a benefit."
"The most valuable feature is the policy routing and application control."
"It does a lot for you for intrusion protection and as an antivirus. The threat management bundle is worth the money. You don't need another company to monitor your web traffic for you. You can do everything yourself on the firewall. You restrict your own black list for people on the firewall. You don't need to pay some other company for another product to do that for you. The firewall can do that for you. So, it's an easy-to-use product for people to be independent. They don't need to rely on other vendors to do what the firewall can do. They can do everything."
"I'm pretty happy with its reliability. It is also very scalable."
"Compared to other firewalls, the segmentation is much easier in FortiGate."
"The stability of Fortinet meets our requirements and I'm satisfied with it."
"A good network security system for medium-sized businesses with an excellent GUI interface that gives a graphic view of network status."
"The interface is good."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiOS are its simplicity, highly user-centric, and performs well. The line speed and for heavy traffic, is helpful for us."
"It's easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of this solution would be the caching feature."
"For my organization, it has become much easier to scan the firewalls because the solution is more user-friendly than competitors."
"I use Meraki in my POCs and with my customers as well."
"The solution is good for load balancing."
"Deployment takes no more than one working day."
"It has a helpful feature for database troubleshooting issues."
"We switched to Meraki because it lets you see what's happening in your LAN and WAN in a graphic and web environment."
"The most valuable feature is that we didn't have any problems with Meraki MX."
"I like the automatic firmware updates. We use the Active Directory to authenticate VPN users."
"I love the simplicity of Meraki MX — specifically, the simplicity of the dashboard."
"The initial setup and configuration are not intuitive and require training."
"I would like to see improvements in the product's application rules."
"The updates Fortinet provides are sometimes unstable."
"Difficult to add or define, and not that easy to configure and manage."
"There can be more security in hybrid implementations. When a customer has a hybrid environment where some parts are in the cloud, we need a consistent security solution for such scenarios."
"The feature which gives us a lot of pain is ASIC architecture."
"They've become quite expensive."
"The integration with third-party tools may be something that they should work on."
"It could more scalable for the lower end users."
"Fortinet needs to make this solution even more robust. Sometimes when we get a DDoS attack, the cannot withstand it. We can run out of sessions very easily. That said, I suppose if you want more a robust system, then you could purchase higher-end solutions, which are more expensive. Still, I would like to see more protection from even in the low-end version."
"FortiOS doesn't work well with all browsers. I think they need to do a better job of making it compatible with the various browsers that are out there."
"The solution needs to adjust its pricing models. With the way they are structured, everything is very disparate and sold separately, and, depending on the solution, it can get quite pricey."
"SD-WAN configuration could be easier."
"The solution needs improvement with DDoS protection."
"The central management can improve in Fortinet FortiOS. It is sometimes difficult to manage all the devices."
"Right now, all the features meet my requirements."
"Management can be improved in Meraki MX."
"The whole Cisco Meraki range requires easier access for cameras. For a security center, it would be helpful to have easier access to cameras through the portal. Its licensing cost could also be better."
"It is very expensive."
"The product is quite complex to set up."
"Could possibly use deeper configurations."
"You cannot use switching behaviors as you see on the Meraki switch."
"In general, the SD-WAN feature needs to be improved. The load sharing and load balancing of the traffic should be improved. I have had some problems with these features in the past."
"Pricing is an area where the solution lacks since it is an expensive tool."
Fortinet FortiOS is ranked 15th in Firewalls with 73 reviews while Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 58 reviews. Fortinet FortiOS is rated 8.4, while Meraki MX is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiOS writes "Provides effective filtering features, good stability but initial setup is moderately challenging". 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". Fortinet FortiOS is most compared with Fortinet FortiManager, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Fortinet FortiWeb, Infoblox Advanced DNS Protection and Darktrace, whereas Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Netgate pfSense. See our Fortinet FortiOS vs. Meraki MX report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.
