We performed a comparison between OPNsense and Sophos UTM 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."The next-gen features, the unified threat management capabilities are something that just about everybody is interested in at this point."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the rules and quality of service."
"The technical support in our region is excellent."
"Fortinet FortiGate's reliability is valuable."
"This is a quality product with ok support, and it is better than the competition we've tried."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is Quota."
"Its user interface is good, and it is always working fine."
"It's great for capturing the traffic and troubleshooting it."
"The most valuable feature is the Dual WAN in OPNSense, which offers advanced capabilities."
"It's open source."
"The most valuable features are reporting, the Sensei plugin, and firewall capabilities."
"The technical support is very good."
"The most valuable features of OPNsense are the GUI and frequent updates."
"The DNS-level filtering is impressive for thwarting time scanners."
"It's more secure and more reliable."
"What I like the most about OPNsense is that it offers an easy-to-use dashboard for device management and control."
"It improved bandwidth utilization and provided link load balancing features for internet and intranet lease lines."
"It is easy to manage."
"Sophos UTM has a good user interface and granular security controls."
"The intrusion prevention is great, and I like dual virus scanning on the network layer because we scan it through Avira and Sophos. Web filtering is also a fantastic option for clients who want to really lock down internet access."
"Brings greater visibility into the network traffic coming inside and passing away from the company."
"It gives us the ability to manage our firewalls from the cloud and deploy a unified configuration onto them. Other competitors like Meraki have that ability, but they fail to optimize it in the way that Sophos has."
"Sophos UTM provides security for our network here and access through a VPN connection for our remote users. It also offers the flexibility to create different tools for accessibility."
"I have no problem with the cost or licensing of this solution. This is a primary reason whay I wanted this solution. It does the same thing cheaper than other name brands."
"Usually, we sell the bundle with the UTM or threat management piece with IPS, IDS. Other providers, such as Palo Alto, are ahead in terms of safe functionality. So, for me, delivering truly safe service is probably something that still needs to be improved."
"The logs need to be better. They need to be more visible and easier to access."
"The central management for the FortiGate Fortinet Firewall needs improvement. They have the manager to do the essential management for both SD-WAN and for the security policy. They should also improve the SD-WAN function."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"Its reporting and pricing need improvement."
"We'd like more management across other integrations."
"Reporting is limited to providing an external appliance for improving the reporting capabilities of the FortiAnalyzer. It does not offer a central management and is also sold separably as an appliance."
"FortiGate support could do some improvements on their IPv6 configuration. Right now it's still in the very early stage for utilizing in an enterprise level network environment."
"While they do have paid options that actually gives better features, for most of the clients, if they tend to take a paid option will instead opt for Fortinet."
"The scalability needs improvement."
"There is room for improvement in SSL inspection."
"An area for improvement in OPNsense is the hardware, which needs to be updated more frequently. DNS blocking is another good feature I want to be added to the solution. pfSense has a peer-blocking feature that I also want to see in OPNsense."
"In terms of improvement, the performance could be enhanced."
"The solution could be more secure."
"The IPS solution could be more reliable."
"OPNsense could improve by making the configuration more web-based rather than shell or command-line-based."
"Sophos UTM's firewall is a bit weak, and some of its features lack depth compared to other products like F5."
"The integration capabilities could be better."
"We didn’t find any issues but I know there have been some in the last few years."
"Finding information about Sophos’ sizing guidelines can actually be difficult. Also, Sophos does not make it clear what they mean by “users” when you are sizing a firewall, which then leads to undersized implementations."
"Monitoring and reporting are areas that need improvement."
"Anti-phishing functionality should be improved."
"The ease of use could be a bit better."
"The logs are not clear, which means that you need an additional piece of software in order to read them clearly."
OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews while Sophos UTM is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 110 reviews. OPNsense is rated 8.4, while Sophos UTM is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Robust network security and management offering a user-friendly interface, open-source flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, with challenges regarding initial setup and the absence of official support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos UTM writes "It's a highly stable platform with very few hardware issues". OPNsense is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, IPFire and WatchGuard Firebox, whereas Sophos UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall and Untangle NG Firewall. See our OPNsense vs. Sophos UTM 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.