Compare Juniper SRX vs. OPNsense
Juniper SRX is ranked 11th in Firewalls with 21 reviews while OPNsense is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 4 reviews. Juniper SRX is rated 7.2, while OPNsense is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX writes "Enables us to integrate a firewall and router in a single product but IPS needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Has good performance but I want to see a friendlier user interface". Juniper SRX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Palo Alto Networks WildFire and Cisco ASA NGFW, whereas OPNsense is most compared with pfSense, Untangle NG Firewall and Sophos UTM. See our Juniper SRX vs. OPNsense report.
Sponsored | ||
Most Helpful Review | ||||
| ||||
 Find out what your peers are saying about Juniper SRX vs. OPNsense and other solutions. Updated: January 2020. 397,983 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 | ||
Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good. For us, the most valuable features are the IPX and the Sourcefire Defense Center module. That gives us visibility into the traffic coming in and going out, and gives us the heads-up if there is a potential outbreak or potential malicious user who is trying to access the site. It also helps us see traffic generated by an end device trying to reach out to the world. The information coming from Talos does a good job... I like the fact that Cisco is working with them and getting the information from them and updating the firewall. The firepower sensors have been great; they do a good job of dropping unwanted traffic. The most important point is the detection engine which is now part of the next-generation firewalls and which is supported by Cisco Talos. The most valuable feature of this solution is AMP (Advanced Malware Protection), as this is really needed to protect against cyber threats. I like the Cisco ASDM (Adaptive Security Device Manager), which is the configuration interface for the Cisco firewall. The technical team is always available when we have problems. | It helped us with its routing capabilities which eased the cost, because otherwise I would have had to take a router and firewall, and then integrate it. With this, however, it was an integration of firewall and routing services all together in a single product. That was one thing that I loved about it. I like the routing and firewall features. The solution's stability is very good. I've found the security features, such as IDS and the VPN most valuable. The deployment is quite easy and fast. The most valuable feature is the virtualization because it can be used for customers who are using the mobile data network to request a private connection to a remote site. There is a lot of flexibility in how you can commit, check, and back out of a configuration. On a scale from one to ten, one being the worst and ten being the best I'd give Juniper SRX an overall rating of eight because of its' competitive price. | The initial setup is easy. It only takes 15-30 minutes to deploy. The feature I find most valuable, is that the program helped me to realize all the requested functionality that was needed. I find the solution to be user-friendly. It has a lot of reports and easy settings. We can open a new VPN connection easily. It's much easier than with Fortinet in our experience. |
Cons | ||
In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline. We were also not too thrilled when Cisco announced that in the upcoming new-gen ASA, iOS was not going to be supported, or if you install them, they will not be able to be managed through the Sourcefire. However, it seems like Cisco is moving away from the ASA iOS to the Sourcefire FireSIGHT firmware for the ASA. We haven't had a chance to test it out. Our latest experience with a code upgrade included a number of bugs and issues that we ran into. So more testing with their code, before it hits us, would help. The software was very buggy, to the point it had to be removed. Most users do not have awareness of this product's functionality and features. Cisco should do something to make them aware of them. That would be quite excellent and useful to organizations that are still using legacy data-center-security products. I have found that Cisco reporting capabilities are not as rich as other products, so the reporting could be improved. The Sandbox and the Web Censoring in this solution need to be improved. It will be nice if they had what you traditionally would use a web application scanner for. If the solution could take a deeper look into HTTP and HTTPS traffic, that would be nice. | IPS is one that I would definitely want to be improved. I would also like SSL VPN to be integrated. The workplace management console needs improvement. It should be a little bit more developed. Also, the interface needs a bit more improvement. The big thing is performance. With all the features turned on it slows down. In terms of other features, I'd like to see a web filter, 10 point control, application control and a DNA filter in the next release. The GUI needs improvement. The Juniper product has to improve in terms of innovation. It's a good stable firewall, but it's nowhere near what it needs to be for a next-generation type firewall. Improvements can be made to the GUI. The GUI can be improved by creating policies to handle IPS requirements. The configuration should be a one-step process. This would make it easier to complete the setup to register the time of operation. | On the customer-side, because I'm a small business, I need a cheaper or free solution option. OPNsense showed me some problems when using it in different environments. The problem is integration with a virtual server. |
Pricing and Cost Advice | ||
Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions. Pricing varies on the model and the features we are using. It could be anywhere from $600 to $1000 to up to $7,000 per year, depending on what model and what feature sets are available to us. We used Check Point and the two are comparable. Cost was really what put us onto the ASAs... the price tag for Check Point was exorbitantly more than what it is for the ASA solution. We are in the process of renewing our three-year license, which costs approximately $24,000 USD for the thirty-six months. The pricing for Cisco products is higher than others, but Cisco is a very good, strong, and stable technology. The program is very expensive. The cost of this solution is high. Some of our customers would be more likely to standardize on Cisco equipment if the cost was lower because a lot of people install cheap equipment. | There was no additional licensing cost because there were no IPS services. It was just a firewall IP circuit router so they have the default licensing. We just need to renew the support yearly. The price of this solution is more than other products, but it's stable, and the technical support is better than I have seen with others. While the price of support is expensive, the price of the solution, itself, is not. The pricing is perhaps half, probably forty percent, of Cisco. The direct support with Juniper is expensive. When you stop using the solution and miss one year of payments, if you want the support back on a specific node, they ask you to pay for the year that you haven't used the node. In terms of pricing, Juniper is in the middle. The most expensive firewall is Palo Alto. If a customer wants the cheapest price they should go for FortiGate. Juniper is in between these products. It has a low price. It is not that expensive. | There are no licensing costs for OPNsence. It costs about $1000. We are not paying any licensing fees. OPNsense is completely free for us. |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs. 397,983 professionals have used our research since 2012. | ||
Top Comparisons | ||
 Compared 38% of the time.  Compared 11% of the time. Compared 9% of the time. | Compared 33% of the time.  Compared 14% of the time. Compared 13% of the time. |  Compared 66% of the time.  Compared 11% of the time.  Compared 8% of the time. |
Also Known As | ||
| Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls | SRX | |
Learn | ||
| Cisco | Juniper | OPNsense Video Not Available |
Overview  | ||
Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) is Cisco's end-to-end software solution and core operating system that powers the Cisco ASA product series. This software solution provides enterprise-level firewall capabilities for all types of ASA products, including blades, standalone appliances and virtual devices. Adaptive Security Appliance provides protection to organizations of all sizes, and allows end-users to access information securely anywhere, at any time, and through any device. Adaptive Security Appliance is also fully compatible with other key security technologies, and so provides organizations with an all-encompassing security solution. Block more threats and quickly mitigate those that do breach your defenses with the industry’s first threat-focused NGFW. | High-performance security with advanced, integrated threat intelligence, delivered on the industry's most scalable and resilient platform. SRX Series gateways set new benchmarks with 100GbE interfaces and feature Express Path technology, which enables up to 1 Tbps performance for the data center. | OPNsense is an open source, easy-to-use and easy-to-build FreeBSD based firewall and routing platform. OPNsense includes most of the features available in expensive commercial firewalls, and more in many cases. It brings the rich feature set of commercial offerings with the benefits of open and verifiable sources. |
Offer | ||
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW | Learn more about Juniper SRX | Learn more about OPNsense |
Sample Customers | ||
| There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow. | 7-Eleven, AARNet Pty Ltd, Allegro Networks, alltours GmbH, Apollo Hotel Papendrecht, Armstrong Atlantic State University, Atlantech Online, Availity, Bajaj Capital, Baloise Insurance, BancABC, BAS Group, Black Lotus, Blue Box, Borealis, Carilion Clinic, Catholic Health System, CATV, Champlain College, Chinas Ministry of Railways, China University of Mining and Technology (CUMT), Cloud Dynamics, CloudSeeds, Cloudwatt, CODONiS, Colt Technology Services, Cork Internet Exchange, CSS Versicherung AG, CyrusOne, Danish Crown, Deloitte Belgium, Department of Energy, Divona Telecom, DQE Communications, DreamHost, European Government Agency, Expedient, Financial Market Information Services Provider, Fluidata, Fonality, Fox Sports, Global Financial Institution, Global Investment Bank, Global Investment Company, Energy Sciences Network (ESnet), Goethe University, HEAnet, High Performance Networks Inc., Hillenbrand | Information Not Available |
Top Industries | ||
Financial Services Firm19% Manufacturing Company10% Comms Service Provider9% Software R&D Company6% Software R&D Company28% Comms Service Provider18% Media Company8% Retailer5% | Comms Service Provider53% Financial Services Firm18% Energy/Utilities Company12% University6% Software R&D Company30% Comms Service Provider28% Media Company10% Construction Company5% | Comms Service Provider24% Software R&D Company24% Media Company11% Retailer11% |
Company Size | ||
Small Business35% Midsize Enterprise25% Large Enterprise40% Small Business37% Midsize Enterprise19% Large Enterprise44% | Small Business38% Midsize Enterprise18% Large Enterprise44% | No Data Available |
Find out what your peers are saying about Juniper SRX vs. OPNsense and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
397,983 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See also Juniper SRX Reviews, OPNsense Reviews, and our list of Best Firewalls Companies.
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.