Compare FortiClient vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps

FortiClient is ranked 13th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 12 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Traps is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 11 reviews. FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks Traps is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of FortiClient writes "Enables me to spend less time managing my user's internet usage but the web filter needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Traps writes "Its multi-layer approach helps my organization with anti-malware, exploit protection, and restrictions". FortiClient is most compared with Microsoft Windows Defender, Kaspersky Endpoint Security and Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP), whereas Palo Alto Networks Traps is most compared with Microsoft Windows Defender, Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP) and CrowdStrike. See our FortiClient vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Anonymous User
Find out what your peers are saying about FortiClient vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
370,827 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
The initial setup of this solution is easy.The solution's most valuable feature is its integration capabilities. The processing is fast and the reporting is also very good.It is very easy and useful. A normal user with basic information can easily connect to any environment.From an application perspective, this solution is stable.The configuration is the most valuable feature.The most valuable feature is that it's easy to deploy. Deployment, configuration, and troubleshooting are very easy.I think the solution is highly scalable.The solution is very scalable. It just depends on the number of licenses an organization has. The enterprise management console is related to the number of clients, and the client interface itself is free to download.

Read more »

The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service.The stability of the solution is very good. We have about 100 users on it right now, and we use it twice a week.It's very stable. I've never experienced downtime for the ASM console or ASM core.We have a complete overview of all our PCs and it's very easy to handle and to use the interface. It has a lot of benefits for us.It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application.The most valuable features are the fact that it was running in the background and it would intercept any weird stuff, and the fact that it would send things directly to the cloud for sandboxing. It's quite practical.After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent.Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about.

Read more »

Cons
FortiClient is not communicating with the new version of the firewall.The pricing of the solution should be less expensive.Technical support is awful. Their online response time is not prompt. They should not respond after four or five days. Their support guys are not competent enough. Small issues are taking time.The memory check needs to be improved, giving better visibility into the run-time memory.The pricing could use improvement.The price could also use improvement.I would like to see an improvement in the web filter, because I think it can be more user-friendly.Initially, the support was very poor. It is getting better, but they should continue to improve this.

Read more »

It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously.The solution needs better reports. I think they should let the customer go in and customize the reports.In the next release, I would like to see more UI improvements. Their UI is a bit basic. When we are speaking about Palo Alto Networks they are the big company, so they can improve the UI a little bit. The UI, the reports, the log system can all be improved.Currently, if you use Palo Alto endpoint protection as the only solution it's very complicated to remove pre-existing threats.Managing the product should be easier.There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly.There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results.Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
The price is okay and competitive.Fortinet requires you to buy a lot of product in order for you to have proper protection.An annual license costs about 1.5 to 3,000 US dollars. There are no additional costs.Anyone can download this product for free, but you have to have a FortiGate gateway that you are connecting to.Licensing was free up to ten users and after that, it was pretty reasonable.

Read more »

The price was fine.When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward.I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require.It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses.The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase.It is "expensive" and flexible.Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance.We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business solutions are best for your needs.
370,827 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
5,348
Comparisons
4,483
Reviews
12
Average Words per Review
374
Avg. Rating
7.9
Views
18,485
Comparisons
13,155
Reviews
10
Average Words per Review
797
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
Cyvera
Learn
Fortinet
Palo Alto Networks
Overview

Securing your endpoints against sophisticated threats on a myriad of devices can be very challenging:

  • Managing separate endpoint features is complex and time-consuming.
  • Disparate security products don't share intelligence, resulting in slow threat response.
  • Lack of InfoSec expertise to effectively administer endpoint security can let threats slip through your defenses.

Traps replaces legacy antivirus and secures endpoints with a multi-method prevention approach that blocks malware and exploits, both known and unknown, before they compromise endpoints such as laptops, desktops and servers.

Offer
Learn more about FortiClient
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks Traps
Sample Customers
Black Gold Regional Schools, Amadeus Hospitality, Jefferson County, Chunghwa Telecom, City of Boroondara, Dimension DataCBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBank
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm38%
Transportation Company13%
Non Profit13%
Media Company13%
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company22%
Mining And Metals Company22%
Media Company11%
Hospitality Company11%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company25%
Comms Service Provider13%
Media Company8%
Financial Services Firm7%
Find out what your peers are saying about FortiClient vs. Palo Alto Networks Traps and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
370,827 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business 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