We performed a comparison between Check Point CloudGuard Network Security and Meraki MX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Unified Threat Management (UTM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The notable features that I have found most valuable are that it includes the antivirus, and also IPS, and even SD-WAN."
"Overall security features and performance routing is good."
"Consolidated our network environment at all locations, but mainly at our datacenter."
"The GUI is good."
"It's super reliable. I don't think I've ever had a reliability issue with it."
"Overall, the pricing of the solution is very good. The product offers good value."
"The solution is easy to configure and maintain remotely."
"The initial setup of Fortinet FortiGate was straightforward."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its scalability. You will only have to pay less for scaling up. Its notable benefit is deployment complexity. Regional deployment is simpler compared to on-premise setup."
"Advanced check prevention is a great feature that provides threat intelligence at speed."
"The VPN features in CloudGuard Network Security have been the most valuable for us."
"The most valuable feature of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is the ease of use. It was not difficult to learn."
"Workflows across the company ecosystem have can flow smoothly without experiencing any challenges."
"The versatility is the solution's most valuable feature."
"CloudGuard Network Security provides unified security management across hybrid clouds as well as on-prem. It's very important because when I have unified security, I have better control of the situation. If there's an attack or something like that, we can react faster. It's easier for everyone in the organization to work with the Infinity platform."
"The Identity Awareness blade and dynamic tagging in Azure are valuable because they make access management automatic. Instead of manually setting up access for each new resource, it happens automatically based on the same access policy. This dynamic setup is scalable."
"Easy to administer and saves time when you have many smaller locations that you have to manage."
"The features we have found most valuable are the firewall and the monitoring tools."
"Its ease of configuration and management is very useful for us and for other companies that don't have an onsite IT person. It is easy to configure and easy to manage. It is easy to configure the VPN with the Auto VPN feature."
"The security level of our organization has changed by using Meraki MX Firewalls. We didn't have the UTM before, but now we have sandboxing, tray scanning, attack preventions and monitorization. Our security level has improved."
"The most valuable feature of Meraki MX is I can manage the solution from anywhere remotely, I can throttle bandwidth, and create all rules. Additionally, it is secure for our customers."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"You can use your web browser to do the configuration which is easier than Cisco CLI transcripts."
"Dual WAN connections are greatly simplified and point-to-point VPNs automatically connect regardless of what WAN connection is active."
"The captive portal could be improved."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The support is the main thing that needs to be improved."
"I would suggest that Fortinet add sandboxing to their solution."
"The way everything is set up could be easier. Currently, people need a lot of experience and knowledge to administer it and to link it to devices."
"With FortiGate, the main complaint that I have heard is about the technical support."
"We sometimes have issues with FortiGate's routing table in the latest firmware update. We had to downgrade the device because our customers complained about bugs."
"The support structure needs to be improved because every time we contact them, there is a delay in the response."
"It needs to cover additional kinds of infrastructure, like containers and serverless options. It's somewhat limited in that area."
"Its price is fair, but it can be more favorable."
"There is room for improvement, especially concerning the integration with the management center. It would be beneficial if tasks that currently require scripts could be performed directly from the GUI."
"They can improve their security features to the next advanced level so that their efficiency in catching the malware can become 100%, and there is no scope for any data loss or leakage from the system due to any issue."
"I would like to see a step-by-step initial installation of the firewall. That would be really helpful. Like in Oracle appliances, when you start it asks you, what's your current IP address? An initial setup should be a step by step and intuitive process. You click on "begin," it asks you some simple questions. You fill in the blanks - your current IP address, what you want to do, you want to set up a site to site VPN, for example, that kind of thing. That would be the smartest thing to have."
"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."
"The initial setup is difficult. It took me three tries to get it right. The setup took two or three hours."
"The threat scanning system should categorize the level of threats to enhance reliable data interpretation."
"We could have more reporting options and the ability to send alarms to the administrator."
"The product could incorporate tools like ThousandEyes into the system so we can see things directly."
"The configuration options for firewall and IPS have limitations."
"The current lead time is longer for Meraki MX, and it needs to be improved."
"Meraki tech support staff have a lot more visibility into your network than you do, which is frustrating at times. I understand the approach is to keep the dashboard easier to understand. This will frustrate more advanced users at times."
"They're very complacent and I find the rule set to be a little arcane."
"Expensive licensing and firewall stops immediately working if the license is not renewed at expiration date."
"It would be nice if the different services, including the SIEM SOC and endpoint detection and response (EDR) were integrated into one, so that I don't have to go to different vendors for different services."
More Check Point CloudGuard Network Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is ranked 5th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 120 reviews while Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 57 reviews. Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is rated 8.6, while Meraki MX 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 Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is most compared with Azure Firewall, VMware NSX, Akamai Guardicore Segmentation, Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Netgate pfSense. See our Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs. Meraki MX report.
See our list of best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors and best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Unified Threat Management (UTM) 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.
