Compare Cisco Email Security (ESA) vs. Fortinet FortiMail

Cisco Email Security (ESA) is ranked 1st in Messaging Security with 16 reviews while Fortinet FortiMail is ranked 2nd in Messaging Security with 11 reviews. Cisco Email Security (ESA) is rated 8.6, while Fortinet FortiMail is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco Email Security (ESA) writes "Black-listing and white-listing are highly intuitive and easy to do". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiMail writes "User-friendly, multi-platform, easy to setup and troubleshoot". Cisco Email Security (ESA) is most compared with Fortinet FortiMail, Proofpoint Email Protection and FireEye Email Security, whereas Fortinet FortiMail is most compared with Cisco Email Security (ESA), Barracuda Email Security Gateway and Sophos Email Appliance. See our Cisco Email Security (ESA) vs. Fortinet FortiMail report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Email Security (ESA) vs. Fortinet FortiMail and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
373,262 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
Anti-Spam and Advanced Malware Protection are the most valuable features... and we also have the option to block Zero-day attacks.We're consolidating two to three arrays down to one which means that our data center footprint has decreased by like 90%. So we're saving 90% of our space, and it also is much better on power and everything else in our data center. And on top of that, the performance is much, much better than our older arrays.The most valuable feature is the performance and compression. The most useful tool is CloudIQ.Initially, the most valuable feature for us was the SenderBase Reputation, because that reduced the number of emails that were even considered by the system by a huge number...We like the in-built features, like the email filtering based on the IP and domain. Cisco has its own blacklisted domains and IPs, which is very good. This filters around 70 percent of emails from spam, and we are seeing fewer false positives with this.The most valuable feature is the different content filters we are using, such as DKIM.It has the IMS engine, Intelligent Multi-Scan engine, and it does a good job, right out-of-the-box, of blocking the vast majority of things that should be blocked.There were detailed logs available. That was a seriously good feature... It turns out these were actually spoof emails that came into our environment. I got to know about them from the log system.

Read more »

I think the spamming feature is very valuable.The most valuable feature of this solution is the spam filter.Technical support is great. They are able to look at their patches and offer quick responses. We even have an account manager in the Middle East. They are very good.Troubleshooting is very simple because you can see where the email was not delivered and why it would be considered as spam.Technical support is great. They're available 24/7 and their response time is typically within the hour.The solution is very reliable and very stable.A full-featured email gateway solution that contains security threats reliably.This excellent email gateway minimizes spam, inspects suspicious emails and isolates infected attachments with little administrative effort.

Read more »

Cons
The configuration UI should be made more intuitive. Currently, it takes a while to understand how to do the basic configurations.We've had a couple of little things come up, but for the most part, they've been pretty stable.We have occasionally had hardware problems because we are using an appliance-based solution, but that might change. We may consider going to virtual systems.The solution needs to improve its advanced phishing filters. It is very good at filtering things which have bad reputations. However, when phishing or malicious emails are new or coming from a legitimate source, we don't feel that the solution is working.We would like to see more options for the customization of content filters.It would be nice to have an easier way to check on the health of the system, how stressed these appliances are. Sure, you can do it, but it would be helpful to have an easier way to do it, maybe even at a glance.They could improve the filters. In my time at the company, there were several times we had to contact support to update the filters.One of the things that Cisco could improve on with IronPort is the support. Cisco doesn't really have enough engineers who have full, hands-on knowledge of IronPort. Knowledge of it is not something you can find easily compared to other security appliances.

Read more »

Online support sometimes takes up to a week to get back to you.The only drawback to this solution is that the firmware is frequently updated, and each update results in downtime.There are features that other solutions have that this one is lacking, such as reporting options. I hope in future releases they advance their features list.An additional feature that could be added is a pop-up screen notifying you that an email has been blocked, without having to double click on it to take you there it could provide you with a summary explaining why it was on hold or why was it spam when you hover over it with your cursor.It would be nice if we could manage the solution from the cloud so I could handle things off-site if necessary.Limited ability to upgrade hardware may lead to some performance issues that might otherwise be improved.The product could incorporate even more artificial intelligence to enhance the functionality, but it is a competetive and intelligent product as it.The biggest room for improvement would be the deployment. It will be hard for someone who doesn't understand the interface to deploy. If you understand it, you can find your way around the problems.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
It is not that costly. We pay for the solution through a contractor and pay an annual fee.We were using Proofpoint and then we switched to Cisco... reportability was one of the main reasons we switched, but the biggest one was cost. If you can get an equivalent functionality for a better price it's wise to do so. That's what our primary decision came down to: We could get equivalent functionality at a lower price point.There were no other costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.The license was not per user, the license model was per feature. You could choose anti-virus, anti-spam, etc. It was feature-based and charged yearly.Licensing costs depend on how many users there are. It could range between $5 and $7 per month, per user.Pricing depends on your environment and which model you want to buy.In addition to the standard licensing, there is a cost for SMARTnet as well.We do annual licensing for ESA and SMA together, and possibly SmartNet support. Packaged together, the cost is just under $38,000.

Read more »

This is a good solution and value for the money.If you don't need the full bundle that includes everything, you have options for the small or medium enterprise environments.In the future I would like it if there's a possibility to lower the price of the bandwidth and UTM. It is quite expensive.Pricing is based on initial license purchase and use volume.Pricing is straight-forward and renewable without complicated pricing structures.The annual cost is $55,000.It is an expensive product.The licensing model for this solution is better because it is based on the box and not the number of users.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Messaging Security solutions are best for your needs.
373,262 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
1st
out of 43 in Messaging Security
Views
9,157
Comparisons
5,774
Reviews
15
Average Words per Review
840
Avg. Rating
8.7
2nd
out of 43 in Messaging Security
Views
4,608
Comparisons
3,457
Reviews
9
Average Words per Review
671
Avg. Rating
8.8
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
IronPort, Cisco Email SecurityFortiMail
Learn
Cisco
Fortinet
Overview

Customers of all sizes face the same daunting challenge: email is simultaneously the most important business communication tool and the leading attack vector for security breaches. Cisco Email Security enables users to communicate securely and helps organizations combat Business Email Compromise (BEC), ransomware, advanced malware, phishing, spam, and data loss with a multilayered approach to security.

FortiMail appliances and virtual appliances are proven, powerful email security platforms for any size organization — from small businesses to carriers, service providers, and large enterprises. Purpose-built for the most demanding messaging systems, FortiMail appliances employ Fortinet’s years of experience in protecting networks against spam, malware, and other message-borne threats.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco Email Security (ESA)
Learn more about Fortinet FortiMail
Sample Customers
SUNY Old Westbury, CoxHealth, City of Fullerton, IndraMagromer Cueros y Pieles S.A.
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Energy/Utilities Company29%
Manufacturing Company14%
Healthcare Company14%
Retailer7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Energy/Utilities Company35%
Comms Service Provider20%
Software R&D Company13%
Media Company6%
No Data Available
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business31%
Midsize Enterprise19%
Large Enterprise50%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise77%
Large Enterprise13%
REVIEWERS
Small Business54%
Midsize Enterprise31%
Large Enterprise15%
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Email Security (ESA) vs. Fortinet FortiMail and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
373,262 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Messaging Security 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.
Sign Up with Email