We performed a comparison between Digital Guardian and Fortinet FortiClient based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Data Loss Prevention (DLP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The feature we call desktop recording is the most valuable aspect of the solution. Not only can we collect data from the user's usage, but we also capture his screenshots when he is trying to steal the data."
"The technical support is really terrific."
"I like the solution's adaptive inspection and container inspection."
"It has the added advantage of offering forensic analysis."
"It has been scalable."
"Some of the features that are highly appreciated are its robust data loss prevention capabilities, flexible deployment options, and the ability to monitor data transfer across multiple vectors."
"It can scale from 100 to 10,000. There's no problem with the scalability."
"In Digital Guardian, they have the cloud correlation servers that give you visibility work like EBR and the correlation server works very well for security analysis."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiClient is its performance."
"The initial setup is very good."
"Remote connectivity is its most valuable feature."
"I find all of the features valuable."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy."
"Fortinet FortiClient is easy to use, and the single-access managed login is pretty good."
"The setup for FortiClient is really straightforward."
"We find the VPN features valuable."
"Digital Guardian is an excellent solution but our experience with the partner has been the most horrible experience we have ever had with any partner."
"The initial setup is a bit more complex than other solutions."
"The room for improvement with Digital Guardian is that it will be better with the Linux agent because it is the only DLP solution for Linux workstations. It still needs to upgrade the agents to the latest version for the Linux kernel."
"Technical support could be better."
"If the client uses Windows 10 or 11 and Microsoft updates the operating system's version, Digital Guardian must update their product to match compatibility."
"The solution has complexities around policy creation and deployment."
"There are a lot of issues with the current version of the Endpoint agent. It's not stable, it's resource-consuming, and there are some performance issues. If they could improve the stability of the agent it would be great."
"Some features on Mac and Linux are not complete currently. For example, some device control features haven't been transferred over to the other systems. If they could have their Windows features also available on Mac and Linux, that would be perfect. Some of our customers have a Mac environment for their RD environment. Having the solution fully capable of handling everything in a Mac environment is crucial."
"The user interface on the central server could be improved."
"Fortinet FortiClient could improve the compatibility with mobile applications that are allowed and sometimes they do not respond. However, Microsoft Windows applications are very good."
"I would like to see an improvement in the web filter, because I think it can be more user-friendly."
"I would like to see endpoint detection and response included."
"FortiClient is not communicating with the new version of the firewall."
"In terms of improvements, their SSL VPN tunnel can be a lot better. I've seen other products that have got much better VPN features than Fortinet. Some of my colleagues get this error called "License not available." When they get this error, they have to uninstall and reinstall it. This kind of problem is there, and sometimes, we have to open a case with Fortinet to resolve it. Their support is quick, so we are able to resolve and move forward. In terms of new features, when it is connecting, it should check the endpoint and say whether the end client is actually safe enough or whether there is a vulnerability. It should give a pop-up on the client itself. Because I'm on the admin side, I can also see this information in the log. However, if a non-IT user, such as a user from finance, is working on this and there is some problem, he or she would not know about this and would call IT admin to say that this is not working. If the users get a message explaining why and what is happening, it is easy for them to understand."
"The solution's access control could be improved."
"I would like for the next release to be more user-friendly for users to do not have as much of a technical background."
Digital Guardian is ranked 10th in Data Loss Prevention (DLP) with 11 reviews while Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 16th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 85 reviews. Digital Guardian is rated 7.4, while Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Digital Guardian writes "Great data classification and data discover with built-in endpoint detection and response". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". Digital Guardian is most compared with Forcepoint Data Loss Prevention, Symantec Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Purview Data Loss Prevention, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business. See our Digital Guardian vs. Fortinet FortiClient report.
We monitor all Data Loss Prevention (DLP) 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.
