We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and Sophos XG based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is notable for its cutting-edge threat prevention, centralized administration, and focus on safeguarding cloud environments. Sophos XG is highly regarded for its robust capabilities, user-friendly interface, and extensive defense against harmful threats.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security could benefit from enhancements in the support system, feature additions, data protection visibility, DLP feature, configuration process, integration, documentation, and flexibility. Sophos XG requires improvements in antivirus, graphical interface, performance, logging, support, setup process, configuration, functionality, sales policies, firewall upgrades, network monitoring, content filtering, GDPR features, search engine, stability, user-friendliness, firmware upgrades, and remote access.
Service and Support: Some customers appreciate Check Point's technical support, while others are dissatisfied with the slow response time. Sophos XG's support receives mixed reviews, with some customers finding it helpful and responsive, while others express dissatisfaction with unhelpful and unresponsive assistance.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is described as straightforward and uncomplicated, although some users note that it can be challenging and necessitates technical proficiency. Sophos XG's initial setup is generally considered simple and straightforward, although certain users find it difficult or extremely challenging. The ease of setup is influenced by factors such as familiarity with the product and technical expertise.
Pricing: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is considered costly for setup, whereas Sophos XG provides flexible pricing based on functionality. Check Point's pricing varies with organization size and country, while Sophos offers competitive pricing, particularly for educational institutions.
ROI: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security offers a cost-effective solution with improved performance, providing an ROI ranging from 80% to 85%. Sophos XG boasts an ROI of 100% or higher, reducing support costs and enhancing security practices.
Comparison Results: Check Point CloudGuard Network Security outperforms Sophos XG. Users find the setup of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security to be simple and intuitive. Check Point offers a wider range of valuable features, including VPN Blade, IPS Blade, URL filtering, and Applications Control Blade, along with advanced threat prevention capabilities and centralized security.
"The IPsec tunnels are very easily created, and quite interoperable with devices from other vendors."
"A strong point of FortiGate is that the graphical interface is complete and easy to use, especially if we think there is a list of operations that we are able to perform inside."
"Some of the key features of the solution is that it has good reporting, you can receive many details from the connection, for example, clients and website information."
"Mainly the FortiGate reporting system is very good. It guides us through all the expectations of security. Fortinet provides us all that we need for security. Also, Fortinet FortiGate is a next-generation firewall. It is much more advanced than others."
"The email protection and VPN features are the most valuable."
"The technical support in our region is excellent."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are remote access, web filtering, and IPS."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is the simple configuration."
"The security configuration features have enhanced the reliable coordination of programs and data safety."
"The program is very stable."
"We are using gateways, and I appreciate the high-availability gateways they have. They stand out more than the competitors."
"We find all the features valuable, particularly the firewall, application control, URL filtering, and HTTPS detection."
"The tool's deployment is rapid. Its dashboard is also useful. It's easy to deploy both on-premises and in Azure. In an office with VMware running, deployment is a simple process. Similarly, in Azure, deployment is easy and scalable. Adding more CPUs is a straightforward task – just shut it down, modify the security, and restart. This ease of use translates into cost and resource savings, and faster deployment times."
"Check Point CloudGuard technical support is good."
"The most valuable features are the VPN Blade, IPS Blade, the URL filtering, and the Applications Control Blade."
"Identity awareness, URL filtering, IDS, DLP, Content Filtering, VPN, and Application Control are all excellent."
"Great reporting feature and great customer support."
"Valuable features include: the ease of setting up the VPN connection; the fact they have the cloud management option, so I can manage the firewall on a cloud platform from anywhere I am; the user interface is very user-friendly, so it's very easy for the administrator to make any policy changes."
"Price-wise the solution offers acceptable rates. You can find cheaper solutions on the market but when you go cheaper you have fewer features. Today, based on iQuate market the price is very reasonable and affordable, and it's good if you get a good discount. Discounts can be offered by the vendor. If it's a competitive upgrade which means the customer is upgrading from another vendor, Sophos provides extra discount so they can win the deal. In general, it is a good price."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"As a security solution, it's a very good security solution."
"The most valuable feature, according to the setup we have at our work place here, is the flexibility of the system or the firmware that's running the appliance. It's so flexible, performing multiple rules with different configurations. According to the set up here, we need to implement several firewalls with different access levels, because we have a variety of users. For this requirement, it's very flexible and very easy to use."
"Using Sophos endpoint and the firewall, synchronized security is easy."
"The most valuable features are the central management, the user VPN, and communications."
"The support system could be improved."
"Fortinet doesn't provide multiple virtual firewalls which would facilitate end users and customers."
"The feedback that I have received is that the performance could be better, and the user experience is not as good compared to a previous solution we used. It could be more user-friendly. Of course, it still works fine for our operations."
"The solution is very expensive."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding FortiAnalyzer to its solution, we should not have to use another solution. FortiAnalyzer can provide more detailed information."
"We had some issues in the beginning while setting it up, but after doing the firmware update, it is working fine."
"The support costs and licensing are sometimes so expensive."
"It is very expensive, and their support is not very good. I hope that their technical support will be better in the future."
"The deployment phase takes too much time."
"Check Point CloudGuard Network Security could improve by making it easier to configure."
"The convergence time between cluster members is still not perfect. It's far away from what we get in traditional appliances. If a company wants to move mission-critical applications for an environment to the cloud, it somehow has to accept that it could have downtime of up to 40 seconds, until cluster members switch virtual IP addresses between themselves and start accepting the traffic. That is a little bit too high in my opinion. It's not fully Check Point's fault, because it's a hybrid mechanism with AWS. The blame is 50/50."
"We miss full blade support for all blades that are compatible with the cluster. Especially notable is the lack of support for Identity Awareness in active standby environments for customers. In our setup, transitioning to Connective clusters would be preferable for maintaining connections during failover situations."
"This application can be more integrated with web application firewalls. Better integrations would provide more granularity, which would be helpful for focusing on the application itself and preventing attacks. It would be good to include the cross-domain search. If you have multiple firewalls that are managed on the same platform and you want to check who is using some particular objects or where a specific ID is being used, it should provide an option for this kind of search instead of having to check one by one on each firewall."
"The solution is not that flexible when deploying on-prem."
"I would like to see more focus on east-west traffic inspection and AWS."
"Check Point could show us use cases that would help us in Czech and could help us with security threats in our specific country."
"The interface could be simplified and diagnostic system graphs improved."
"It would be better if they made their own hardware like Palo Alto and Fortinet. They use their own ASICs and claim it is more secure."
"SD-WAN needs to be improved because it often fails at the network security level."
"The only area that requires improvement is scalability."
"The price should be cheaper."
"Their updates can be faster and more regular."
"The initial set up process can be a little tricky, especially when you are registering with Sophos using your registration number. Setup is not necessarily complex, but it's not trouble-free. You do have connectivity issues at the initial setup with registering the device on the Sophos platform to access the advanced features. It doesn't always go through the first time around. That may be an issue with the quality of our automation. I'm not sure exactly what it is."
"The SD-WAN could be improved."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 119 reviews while Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Sophos XG is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security writes "The solution has good threat emulation, threat extraction, and reporting features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Easy to use and deploy with an improved pricing structure in place". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Cisco Secure Firewall, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Sophos XGS, SonicWall TZ and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Sophos XG 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.