We performed a comparison between Juniper SRX Series Firewall and WatchGuard Firebox based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ease of use and there are several operating systems that can include the hardware capacities. In the newer releases, the resources were more useful because they were included in the operating system."
"The ease of setting the solution up is a valuable aspect for us."
"I like that you are able to manage FortiGate from the FortiManager to create a more centralized environment."
"It increases security posture and is helpful for firewall reporting, intrusion protection, web filtering, and SD-WAN implementation."
"I like Fortinet FortiGate's antispam filter, SPN, and clustering features."
"The next-gen features, the unified threat management capabilities are something that just about everybody is interested in at this point."
"Its stability is the most valuable."
"It's very fast and easy to configure."
"The main features are safeguarding their data and ensuring robust security services for organizational data."
"Technical support has been quite helpful."
"It helps us perform our daily jobs."
"It's fine, and it's good. It's very stable."
"The scalability is fine."
"The Juniper SRX series is easy to use."
"It's a reliable firewall and very stable, for both the hardware and applications it is stable."
"Using a Juniper CLI, you configure a "candidate configuration", then "commit" it to bring it live. If you do not like it or messed up something, you just "rollback" to the previous configuration. It can all be done in a matter of minutes. This is super handy once you get use to it."
"Because we bought two firewalls... we need a central place to manage the policies and deploy them to both devices. It's good that it provides a system management console that is able to manipulate and manage policies in one place and deploy them to different locations."
"The GUI is easy and intuitive."
"It's very easy to use, especially compared to similar products. A lot more users use the WatchGuard appliance now than use the SonicWall appliance because of the ease of usability."
"It's pretty simple to use. It's pretty simple to understand, and there's plenty of documentation. It does a pretty good job of what it is meant to do."
"It's hard to pick one feature over another. But if I had to pick one, the UTM would be the most valuable because of the notification. I get notified via email if there is any type of threat detection or alert, telling me something is wrong."
"One of my favorite features is the Geolocation service, where you can actually block specific activity or IP addresses registered to certain countries. For example, I don't want any web traffic from Russia or North Korea. I may even lock down certain policies down to 'I only want U.S. IP addresses.' I find that very useful."
"The policy monitoring and allowing different traffic flows are the most useful features for us; regulating which traffic comes in and out."
"WatchGuard Firebox is easy to configure and has a nice user interface."
"Its price could be better."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve if it had a cloud-managed solution."
"Technical support is good but the response time could be faster."
"My only complaint about FortiGate is a lack of QinQ VLAN tunneling. I haven't found this feature in any Fortinet product. You can do this on all Cisco routers, including the smaller models. However, QinQ isn't available on the biggest, most expensive Fortinet units. They still don't have that. I think now we're on software version 6.0, and they still haven't found a solution for QinQ. It isn't a dealbreaker, but that's my main complaint."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding FortiAnalyzer to its solution, we should not have to use another solution. FortiAnalyzer can provide more detailed information."
"Security is a continuous process. In every product, there is a requirement for improvement. Its pricing should also be improved according to Indian market requirements. They must also improve on the reporting part. Its reporting can be more precise. If we can get a real-time report in a specific format, it will be helpful for customers to know about the current status of their security."
"I have to say that the initial setup was complex. The deployment took a few days to get set up. Initially, we were using an IPVanish. We switched to this tool since we thought it would be easier. But it turns out it wasn't easier to set up and run."
"Lacks training for new features."
"The configuration is difficult and it should be easier."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"It would be good if Junos had "unique commands" between all hierarchical levels, discarding the use of the "Run" command."
"It's a good stable firewall, but it's nowhere near what it needs to be for a next-generation type firewall."
"Both the web management and the graphical user interface are inadequate and should be improved."
"We'd like to improve the stability and the kill rate."
"The big thing is performance. With all the features turned on it slows down."
"Their models for service providers could improve."
"Firebox would be improved with integration for endpoint protection solutions."
"There could also be better reporting. For example, there should be more out-of-the-box management reports."
"The solution needs to improve its accessibility."
"Last year, I had an issue with one of the Fireboxes going down. It was overheated, because my server room became overheated and this fried it."
"We would like to see granular notification settings and more advanced filtering in traffic monitoring."
"In terms of the reporting and management features — and this isn't necessarily a WatchGuard issue, this seems to be more of an industry-wide issue — you get reports, but a lot of times you don't know what you're looking at. You're so overwhelmed with the data. You're getting a lot of stuff that doesn't matter, so it takes time to parse through it, to actually get what you want to know."
"Sometimes I would like to copy a rule set from one box to another box in a direct way. This is a feature that is not present at the moment in WatchGuard."
"The software in it could be a bit more friendly for an amateur user. I look at it and don't understand what half the stuff is. Looking at the interface, it is all mumbo-jumbo to me. It's not a simple interface. You have to be an IT guy to understand it. It is not for your average person to use, then walk away from it. It is much more entailed."
Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 19th in Firewalls with 86 reviews while WatchGuard Firebox is ranked 13th in Firewalls with 78 reviews. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8, while WatchGuard Firebox is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Firebox writes "Offers a streamlined deployment, intuitive interface and robust security features". Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, whereas WatchGuard Firebox is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, OPNsense, SonicWall TZ and Meraki MX. See our Juniper SRX Series Firewall vs. WatchGuard Firebox report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors, best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors, and 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.
