We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiGate-VM and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Fortinet FortiGate-VM is highly regarded for its robust security features, including geofencing, firewalling, IPS, antivirus, and a user-friendly interface. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls excel in embedded machine learning, real-time attack prevention, and the ability to accurately identify applications.
Fortinet FortiGate-VM needs enhancements in key activation, log management, cloud management, MFA offerings, web filter options, application inspection, GUI features, bandwidth issues, VPN connectivity, pricing, performance, and documentation. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls require improvements in SD-WAN customization, best practices, machine learning capabilities, troubleshooting tools,next-generation capabilities, rule creation, monitoring interface, bug fixing, configuration support, IoT security, traffic shaping, machine learning for virus prevention, security functions, usability, training programs, SSL inspection, external dynamic list feature, internet filtering, API integration, and bug fixing.
Service and Support: Some customers have praised the support team of Fortinet FortiGate-VM for their quick response times and knowledge. However, other customers have mentioned slow response times and difficulties in finding information quickly. Customer service for Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls has received mixed reviews. Some customers have praised the knowledgeable support team and timely issue resolution. However, others have mentioned difficulties in reaching the support team and issues with the support ticketing system.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Fortinet FortiGate-VM is generally straightforward and easy, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is not complex and easy. Prior knowledge can simplify Fortinet's setup, whereas Palo Alto may require proper planning.
Pricing: Fortinet offers flexible pricing options with no extra expenses, while Palo Alto is considered pricier. Nevertheless, Palo Alto is known for its reliability and high performance as a firewall solution.
ROI: Fortinet FortiGate-VM offers enhanced stability and heightened security. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls provide greater visibility, reporting capabilities, and streamlined management.
Comparison Results: Fortinet FortiGate-VM is the preferred solution as it is highly recommended due to its easy setup, robust security features, cost-effectiveness, and satisfactory ROI. Users find it user-friendly, easy to deploy, and with an intuitive interface.
"This is an easy solution to deploy."
"I'm pretty happy with its reliability. It is also very scalable."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is good to use, and most importantly, the pricing. The customer especially likes the discount when they trade up or something like that."
"The FortiGate controls the user's activities and maximizes my bandwidth use overall."
"Its stability is the most valuable."
"It's super reliable. I don't think I've ever had a reliability issue with it."
"The most important features with FortiGate are the web filter and application controls. We can control our internet usage and use the web filter for application purposes."
"The signature database and zero-day detection are Fortinet FortiGate's most valuable features."
"Regarding specific features, I appreciate the option for external selection, where you can choose either to use a default or create a self-description. This simplifies the process compared to other vendors that require creating a test extension profile and then applying it to the installation. With FortiGate, there is a streamlined approach. From the benefits perspective, clients mainly see cost reduction, especially with FortiGate VM Firewall, as it eliminates the need for additional hardware."
"The functionality provided is very good."
"Operations have been flawless."
"The customer care center of Fortinet is good. For all the requests that we have done, they work as fast as possible, so this is a good point for Fortinet."
"We use it to ensure that our network is properly protected from viruses and malware."
"In spite of the solution being inexpensive, it has everything one would need."
"Technical support is very helpful."
"It's almost perfect. It's very stable. We don't have many hardware issues."
"The solution allows us to set parameters on where our users can go. We can block certain sites or ads if we want to."
"The initial setup was very easy."
"Operationally, it is easier, and the manageability and their security features are good."
"The application control portion of the solution is its most valuable aspect."
"The user experience is good and the configuration is very easy."
"The WildFire reporting and Cortex XDR platform have huge infrastructures in the cloud that secures the network against threats. So, we have the potential on the system, specifically for users, where we take care of this since the user is the most dangerous. We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis, rather than a daily or weekly update like I used to with different AV vendors. These features can detect viruses and malware more quickly, which is super important."
"The configuration is very simple."
"Ability to log each and every application."
"The scalability could be better."
"If they could extend their fabric towards other vendor environments for integration, that would be great."
"The security of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"NGN, reporting and controls."
"Fortinet Fortigate could benefit by simplifying some of their processes."
"The solution is very expensive."
"Application management can be improved."
"Monitoring and reporting could be better."
"The solution should provide more useful GUI features."
"There should be a bit more automation."
"Integration could be better. Whatever devices I'm using with FortiGate are all compatible. The access points and switches are also FortiGate, so I can easily integrate them. But it would be better if we could embed other devices as well. There are compatibility issues with other brands, and we need that. We can only integrate universal brands with FortiGate. The initial setup could also be easier."
"We haven't attempted to scale the solution just yet. If we want to scale this solution we may have to look at other models. With certain requirements, we probably wouldn't be able to scale it so well as it is right now."
"The graphical user interface should be enhanced."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"The user interface (UI) and the performance of interface both need improvement."
"FortiGate's application load balancing has to be improved. They need to improve a lot on the load balancing and RAF side. They are far behind Citrix in that regard."
"The SD-WAN product is fairly new. They could probably improve that in terms of customizing it and making the configuration a little bit easier."
"The scalability compared to other products is not good. You need to change the box whenever you want your number of connection sessions to increase."
"The solution could be simplified."
"Having a better pricing model would make this product more competitive, and more affordable for our customers."
"We are not happy with Palo Alto at all. It would be better if they provided more support for the firewall. We have a few pending issues with the configuration for each application. We cannot deploy them yet due to some support-related problems in the firewall. We have deployed a few policies for DNS spoofing and DNS attacks, but we could only block a few IP addresses through the policy. That's DNS security, and we have configured a few policies for DNS spoofing and more. URL categorization and URL filtering are not yet adequately maintained. For example, if you created a few rules in the rule-based configuration and made some rules downstairs, you will lose some of them if you give access upstairs. It's not giving us a proper solution for which route it is using. We need to apply the application-based policies and URL filtering-based policies. It creates more issues because we are not getting good support from the team."
"I would like them to bring in some features that would encourage traffic shaping or bandwidth routing, like other UTM firewalls, because the solution should be capable of limiting the bandwidth for rules."
"Personally, I feel that their dashboards for reporting and things like that need some improvement."
"The user interface can be significantly simplified."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiGate-VM is ranked 9th in Firewalls with 113 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 161 reviews. Fortinet FortiGate-VM is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiGate-VM writes "An easy-to-manage and configure tool that provides ample documentation to help with the setup phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". Fortinet FortiGate-VM is most compared with Azure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, Fortinet FortiOS, OPNsense and Netgate pfSense, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Netgate pfSense. See our Fortinet FortiGate-VM vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.
In the best tradition of these questions, Feature-wise both are quite similar, but each has things it's better at, it kind of depends what you value most.
PA is good at app control, web filtering and such like, they have always been top of the pile there. The GUI is very good, and their product is very user-focused.
Fortinet is good for scalability and predictable high throughput (ASICs in the hardware), and useful things like authentication flexibility, CLI config (if you have any networking/Cisco people, they always seem to prefer CLI over GUI) and have better OT features, maybe relevant to your manufacturing use?
Fortinet seem to have a broader integration offering with their security fabric than PA do, plus they can do Fortinet-based wifi, switching, etc. Depends if you are prepared to go all-in with a single vendor.
Hi,
Both FT and PA have compelling features for large Enterprises. I would like to add a few good points about Fortinetwhich might be helpful ( from my 13 years of engagement with them as Distributor and Partner)
Fortinet:
Have higher throughput; which comes with competitive rates
Wide range of models to select to meet your requirement, without spending heavliy
Outstanding customer support and very active customer care team
Easly available skilled resources from the channel for deployment and post-implementation support
Regards
Abhilash
Hello. The question is what you are going to have as a result of application