We performed a comparison between Juniper SRX and Palo Alto Networks WildFire based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Juniper SRX finishes slightly ahead of Palo Alto Networks WildFire in this comparison. Juniper SRX provides robust enterprise network protection and connectivity and comprehensive performance, is stable, and scales easily. Palo Alto Network WildFire can be challenging for some users to learn. The overall configuration is a bit complex to use.
"This solution made it very easy to manage our bandwidth."
"The VPN is the most valuable feature."
"It's very easy to configure."
"Its performance in fulfilling our requirements has been satisfactory."
"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."
"Some of the valuable features are the firewall, IPS, web filter, and gateway capabilities. Additionally, it is easy to use and flexible."
"SSL-VPN is very useful for us and has been very reliable."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"Juniper supports their products very well."
"The solution is stable, inexpensive, and works well for medium size companies."
"The CLI works perfectly."
"You can scale the solution."
"The Juniper SRX series is easy to use."
"On a scale from one to ten, one being the worst and ten being the best I'd give Juniper SRX an overall rating of eight because of its' competitive price."
"I have used technical support quite a bit, and they are really good."
"What I like the most about Juniper is that they have the same CLI on all routers, switches, and firewalls. If you have worked with any Juniper device, such as a Juniper router, you will be able to work with an SRX, which is really cool. It is a nice experience to work with every device of Juniper, not only firewalls."
"With this product, we receive the best monitoring and reports."
"For example, if a security Intel threat talks about an IOC. We can then go to our MSP and say, "Is there a signature for this particular type of malware that just came out?" And if they'll say yes, then we'll say, "Okay. Does it apply to these firewalls? And have we seen any hits on it?" There's absolutely value in it."
"The analysis is very fast."
"The technical support is good."
"It gives a more accurate assessment of a virus in terms of whether it's truly a virus, malware, or a false positive. We have some legacy software that could pop up as being something that is malware. WildFire goes through and inspects it, and then it comes back and lets us know if it's a false positive. Usually, when it finds out that it's not a virus, it lets us know that it's benign, and it can exclude it from that scan, which means I don't even have to worry about that one popping up anymore."
"What I like about Palo Alto is that it is a complete product, with everything in it."
"The backup is the best feature."
"The solution is scalable."
"They have to just improve its performance when we enable all UTM features. When you enable all the features, the performance of FortiGate, as well as of Sophos and SonicWall, goes down."
"My only complaint about FortiGate is a lack of QinQ VLAN tunneling. I haven't found this feature in any Fortinet product. You can do this on all Cisco routers, including the smaller models. However, QinQ isn't available on the biggest, most expensive Fortinet units. They still don't have that. I think now we're on software version 6.0, and they still haven't found a solution for QinQ. It isn't a dealbreaker, but that's my main complaint."
"Fortinet FortiGate is not very easy to use. The navigation could be improved to make it easier to use."
"Monitoring and reporting could be better."
"A lack of integration between our data centers."
"There were quite a few problems with the stability of the system."
"Security is a continuous process. In every product, there is a requirement for improvement. Its pricing should also be improved according to Indian market requirements. They must also improve on the reporting part. Its reporting can be more precise. If we can get a real-time report in a specific format, it will be helpful for customers to know about the current status of their security."
"Their software support needs improvement. I would prefer to have better support for bug fixes. Sometimes, we open a ticket, and it is very difficult to get a solution. Specifically, we are not at all happy with their support for load balancing."
"When I was going to upgrade the OS, the solution didn't accept certain USB devices."
"It did not improve our safety because the IDS does not detect some attacks, but our anti-virus software did."
"As a networking person, I don't really have any major issues with this device. Based on my experience of using it in a cluster, it could be more stable. I had an incident when one of the SRXs in a cluster couldn't learn ARP. It is a good solution, but firewalls don't seem to be an area of development for Juniper. They are focusing on data centers, routers, and switches, not firewalls."
"It was very difficult to deal with and required a lot of support, and the UI is very poor."
"Juniper SRX could improve by adding an IPX feature."
"It needs better interoperability with Cisco gear."
"IPS is one that I would definitely want to be improved. I would also like SSL VPN to be integrated."
"it would be more powerful if Juniper brought out a security product other than the firewall, like anti-spam, endpoint protection, etc. Customers who want to deploy security solutions are not just thinking about firewalls... Juniper should have an end-to-end solution, from the endpoint to the network level."
"I think it would be nice for Palo Alto to work without the connection to the cloud. It is 100% powerful when connected to the cloud. But, if you disconnect from the cloud, you only get 40-50% power."
"The price could be better."
"The support is good but they could be faster."
"The data analytical system for deployment needs to improve."
"The solution can improve its traffic management."
"They can keep on doing more updates. As new malware and viruses are coming out, they can make sure that WildFire is up to date."
"As a firewall and 360 degrees of security, there needs to be more maturity."
"The VPN and decryption need improvement."
Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 86 reviews while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Check Point NGFW and Meraki MX, whereas Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Proofpoint Email Protection, Fortinet FortiSandbox, Check Point SandBlast Network and Zscaler Internet Access.
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.