We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiGate-VM and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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 super reliable. I don't think I've ever had a reliability issue with it."
"It increases security posture and is helpful for firewall reporting, intrusion protection, web filtering, and SD-WAN implementation."
"Our security improved from being able to put in rules and close off unwanted traffic."
"The most valuable feature is the SSL VPN, as it allows us to connect and it separates this product from other firewalls."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiGate was straightforward."
"The product offers very good security."
"Fortinet FortiGate's most valuable features are ease of use, flexibility, and most of the configuration we can be done using the GUI. When we compare Fortinet FortiGate with other solutions the firewall policy are very easy to understand."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable features are site-to-site connections and UTM."
"The most valuable features are the IPS and Antivirus."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its ability to deploy it on live physical hardware. Specifically, when providing firewall services for clients, we can leverage such hardware appliances to support multiple customers on the same hardware."
"The most valuable features are the SD-WAN and the web filtering applications control."
"The interface is decent."
"The combination of SD-WAN and VPN capabilities is the most valuable feature."
"There is an interesting possibility of building a tunnel to a firewall from access points. We use this feature for small branch offices with one to two employees with access to central RDP servers."
"It's a very simple solution to manage."
"The most valuable feature is the Posture Assessment."
"App-ID and User-ID have repeatedly shown value in securing business critical systems."
"In Palo Alto the most important feature is the App-ID."
"Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is very easy to use."
"The most effective features for threat prevention are application-based prevention and WildFire. These features cover various threats, such as ransomware, malware, etc. They provide real-time visibility. By applying appropriate policies, threats can be blocked."
"The VM series has an advantage over the physical version because we are able to change the sources that the machine has, such as the amount of available RAM."
"Embedding it into my application development lifecycle prevents data loss and business disruption, allowing the adoption to operate at the speed of my AWS Cloud."
"What I like about the VM-Series is that you can launch them in a very short time."
"The support from Fortinet FortiGate could improve. They are not easily accessible when we need them. They could improve their response time."
"Technical support could be better. You don't always get the level of help you need right away."
"The solution's framework needs to be frequently updated in order to have a stable solution."
"Fortinet FortiGate can be integrated with different platforms. They have integrations in place, but I can't say they're 100%."
"I would like to see more advanced developments of a wireless controller in the future."
"The inability to scale the FortiAnalyzer to match our growth necessitates the purchase of new hardware."
"Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve the logging and reporting. Additionally, the next-generation application's policies should be improved. When they were released they had bugs."
"Due to its higher cost, Fortinet FortiGate can lead to increased operational expenses."
"The product may not be as robust as Palo Alto. However, unless you are a big bank, you probably won't need it to be."
"his is not a good solution for enterprises. It's better for smaller companies."
"I have had a data issue with physical devices that could improve."
"The solution's web-filtering configuration could be better."
"Capacity-wise, I think the solution's log storage area is something that needs to be increased since, by default, it stores logs for only seven days."
"The stability of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We haven't attempted to scale the solution just yet. If we want to scale this solution we may have to look at other models. With certain requirements, we probably wouldn't be able to scale it so well as it is right now."
"The costs could be lowered."
"Palo Alto should update their documentation to make it more readable and provide easier-to-follow instructions through videos."
"It'll help if Palo Alto Networks provided better documentation."
"The interface is all Java-based. I would prefer an HTML5 interface."
"The only minor issue we've faced is with the app's ID configuration, which requires specific matching for application filtering."
"The tool is very costly."
"It would be good if the common features work consistently in physical and virtual environments. There was an integration issue in the virtual deployment where it didn't report the interface counters, and we had to upgrade to the latest version, whereas the same thing has been working in the physical deployment for ages now. It seems that it was because of Azure. We were using VMware before, and we didn't have any such issues. We do see such small issues where we expect things to work, but they don't because of some incompatibilities. There also seems to be a limitation on how to do high availability in a virtualized environment. All features should be consistently available in physical and virtual environments. It is not always easy to integrate Palo Alto in the network management system. We would like to be able to compare two network management systems. They can maybe allow monitoring an interface through the GUI to create a reference or do a baseline check about whether your network monitoring system is actually giving you the correct traffic figures. You need traffic figures to be able to recognize the trends and plan the capacity."
"The command-line interface is something that some people struggle with and I think that they should have an option to go straight to the GUI."
"The product could be better in terms of performance than one of its competitors."
Fortinet FortiGate-VM is ranked 9th in Firewalls with 113 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 53 reviews. Fortinet FortiGate-VM is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiGate-VM writes "An easy-to-manage and configure tool that provides ample documentation to help with the setup phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Fortinet FortiGate-VM is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiOS, OPNsense, Cisco Secure Firewall and Netgate pfSense, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Huawei NGFW. See our Fortinet FortiGate-VM vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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.
In the best tradition of these questions, Feature-wise both are quite similar, but each has things it's better at, it kind of depends what you value most.
PA is good at app control, web filtering and such like, they have always been top of the pile there. The GUI is very good, and their product is very user-focused.
Fortinet is good for scalability and predictable high throughput (ASICs in the hardware), and useful things like authentication flexibility, CLI config (if you have any networking/Cisco people, they always seem to prefer CLI over GUI) and have better OT features, maybe relevant to your manufacturing use?
Fortinet seem to have a broader integration offering with their security fabric than PA do, plus they can do Fortinet-based wifi, switching, etc. Depends if you are prepared to go all-in with a single vendor.
Hi,
Both FT and PA have compelling features for large Enterprises. I would like to add a few good points about Fortinetwhich might be helpful ( from my 13 years of engagement with them as Distributor and Partner)
Fortinet:
Have higher throughput; which comes with competitive rates
Wide range of models to select to meet your requirement, without spending heavliy
Outstanding customer support and very active customer care team
Easly available skilled resources from the channel for deployment and post-implementation support
Regards
Abhilash
Hello. The question is what you are going to have as a result of application