We performed a comparison between Hillstone CloudEdge and Netgate pfSense based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."I like several features that this product has, such as antivirus and internet navigation inspection. It is also simple to use."
"Virtual Domains (VDOMs) are a feature that we found valuable."
"It increases security posture and is helpful for firewall reporting, intrusion protection, web filtering, and SD-WAN implementation."
"The web filtering feature and the intrusion protection system are the most valuable. It is a resilient appliance. I never had an issue with it in terms of any security breaches."
"It is a good source for firewall protection."
"Fortinet FortiGate is user-friendly and affordable."
"The ease of setting the solution up is a valuable aspect for us."
"Good performance, stability, and virtual domain ability."
"The solution is very easy to download and configure. The initial setup was very easy. The technical support is very good."
"The interface is straightforward and easy to use."
"At our peak time, we have reached more than 5,000 concurrent connections."
"Its scalability is a strong point."
"We generally use it because it's cheap. When we need something more robust we use Barracuda and Sony Wireless Routers. For certain clients, we use pfSense because it's compatible with the VoIP platform."
"The most valuable features of pfSense are security, user-friendliness, and helpful online management."
"One of the advantages of pfSense is that it is very easy to work with. It is a very good open-source solution, and it works really well. pfSense provides a complete package. For some features, it could be the first solution in the world. It is a very good alternative in the market for a firewall solution. You don't need to go to Cisco or other brands with expensive firewalls. pfSense also allows us to offer some support services."
"There is good documentation with a fantastic community and enterprise support."
"It's a good solution for end-users. It's pretty easy to work with."
"The solution could be more evenly structured."
"Difficult to add or define, and not that easy to configure and manage."
"The solution lacks sufficient filtering."
"The firewall engine is not so strong as of now, in my opinion... My second concern is that, while they have Zero-day vulnerability and anti-malware features, the threat engine needs to be strengthened, its efficiency can be increased."
"The solution could be more user friendly."
"I would like to see more advanced developments of a wireless controller in the future."
"The firmware needs improvement because there are bugs when a new release comes through. Sometimes, the configuration changes, and it's a bit harder to see where the fail is. The first time that you have the firmware, it tends to have some issues, and it's better to wait a bit to update the equipment."
"Palo Alto has a feature called WildFire Analysis that is unavailable in FortiGate. WildFire is better than a sandbox because it can address zero-day threats and vulnerabilities. It can immediately identify zero-day threats from the cloud."
"The solution needs more granular level reporting on system usage."
"Other solutions provide more scope for growth. For instance, we can have only 10 to 20 employees on VPN, but other solutions can support more users. We also have more capabilities to increase the performance of the solution."
"The hotspot and the portal feature in this solution are not stable for WiFi access. We use it at least once or twice every day and it crashes. Some modules can be better by improving detection and having new updates. Additionally, we have some issues with clustering and load balancing that could improve."
"Layer 7 advanced firewall features are not included in the solution."
"The product could offer more integrated plugins."
"If you want to take advantage of all of the solution's options, you need to have a bit of a technical background. It's not for a layperson."
"When I checked other packages, it seems they use different tools that are installed on the PSS for functionality. They rely on third-party tools, unlike Fortinet, for example, which has its own tools. In comparison, we also use third-party tools on pfSense. For example, we had a situation where we needed a tool to identify authorized users, and when I searched for a solution, I found a third-party tool. However, using such tools may come with additional costs."
"The solution could be more user-friendly, and the graphical interface needs some work so that someone without an IT background can use the application. I would like the ability to manage the on-premise appliance from the cloud. When I'm not in the office, it would be great to connect to the pfSense server and administer the network remotely."
"The router monitoring needs improvement when compared with Sonicwall."
Hillstone CloudEdge is ranked 32nd in Firewalls with 1 review while Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews. Hillstone CloudEdge is rated 10.0, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Hillstone CloudEdge writes "A stable solution that is easy to configure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". Hillstone CloudEdge is most compared with , whereas Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, KerioControl, Sophos UTM and Cisco Secure Firewall.
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.