We performed a comparison between Check Point Remote Access VPN and Fortinet Forticlient based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Overall, users give Check Point Remote Access VPN higher ratings than Fortinet Forticlient because it offers more security, has good support available, and has proven to create a good ROI.
"It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"The solution has good performance."
"It operates effectively, particularly during challenges like adversities or infrastructure issues."
"The initial set up is not complex."
"The biggest advantage of Check Point Remote Access VPN is that we already use the Check Point firewall. We only needed to enable the feature and do the configuration in order to enable the VPN feature. We didn't need to buy or manage new hardware."
"I found the MEP feature the most valuable. This has improved users' latency allowing the users to connect to the nearest Azure Check Point VM."
"A single login based on a second authentication factor is giving us the possibility of integrating third-party services for authentication based on a security scheme."
"It is easy to install the Endpoint Remote Access VPN client to different platforms."
"The solution offers high scalability as far as adding more users."
"Organizations that already use the Check Point NGFW Solution do not require any additional hardware, which makes the implementation straightforward and reduces the time to go live."
"We like its centralized administration, integration with Active Directory, deployment, and stability of the connection."
"What I find valuable in FortiClient is its patch management capabilities, allowing remote updates efficiently."
"Secure and easy connect is the most valuable feature. It is a reliable solution, and it works."
"This solution makes it easier to work from home."
"From Forticlient, the EMS, the central management is easy to use."
"I find it very easy to configure and also very stable."
"The return on investment was very reasonable. It was low cost and it functioned, so the return on investment was excellent."
"I find all of the features valuable."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"They need to increase their timeout. Right now, it will fail after ten seconds, however, it shouldn't fail until after 20. If you don't get on your phone right away and check on your authentications, it will kick you out."
"I cannot see the full effect of the endpoint solution because it relies on having access to the DNF queries, which might not go through the Check Point firewall when you're using it for perimeter networks. Check Point will not identify the actual source of the net queries. This may be related to the architecture, however, and not poor product issues. I don't know if it can be improved on the Check Point side or not."
"Bug Fixes and enhancement requests should be remediated earlier."
"I would like the support to be faster."
"It's difficult to configure on Linux workstations as Check Point Remote VPN clients support only Windows and Mac devices."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN's enterprise support could be improved."
"It would be good to have Remote Access VPN solutions for Check Point edge services."
"Sometimes it causes the consumption of machine resources, and also improves the scanning since they consume many resources in the clients' machines."
"I think that FortiClient can enhance the multifactor authentication."
"The tool needs to improve its web filtering feature. Its support quality needs improvement. We speak different languages, and this can create misunderstandings."
"The solution's access control could be improved."
"Cloud services are very expensive for us."
"Everybody else is doing AI, machine learning, self-healing, next-generation features. It needs more next-generation features. Everybody else is doing AI, machine learning, self-healing, next-generation features. It needs more next-generation features."
"The initial setup was probably more complex. The configuration was somewhat unclear."
"While we like patch management, it would be nice if it could handle patch management for other solutions, like Microsoft."
"An area of improvement could be better integration with the active directory. I did not find it easy to configure."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 6th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 60 reviews while Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 85 reviews. Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8, while Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point Remote Access VPN writes "Is easy to use and has a nice interface, but the scalability needs to improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Check Point Harmony Mobile, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange and Symantec VIP Access Manager, whereas Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway and Symantec Endpoint Security. See our Check Point Remote Access VPN vs. Fortinet FortiClient report.
See our list of best Enterprise Infrastructure VPN vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.