We performed a comparison between Juniper vSRX and Netgate pfSense 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."With FortiClient, you can easily connect when you are home, check out what you want to do, and connect to your network when you are not at work. You can switch on servers and you can check what is wrong."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is load balancing. It can provide central management and VPNA. Additionally, it has enhanced our security environment."
"Provides good firewall security and has great VPN features."
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"The license management is very valuable. You can get a new license each year, or you can enroll every two to four years. You can get the logs, and you will get the information on the risk in your network and the entire organization. With this information, you can take action on your actives, computers, or devices. You can bring your own device as an SSE."
"The user interface (UI) is very, very good."
"Fortinet FortiGate is scalable for our users. Right now, we have almost 70 users. We do not have any plan to increase our usage of FortiGate. For maintaining the firewall solution, one staff member is enough."
"There are great templates, so you don't have to customize them if you don't want to. You do have the option to custom create some folders and some reports, however, with what is there, you don't really need to go through extra effort, as they already give you a lot of predefined views of reports and so forth."
"It's a very powerful solution and the firewalls offer high performance"
"It's much faster to deploy a power source. If you need to deploy a firewall in the cloud of software, it's much easier and much faster than deploying the office firewall in a rush."
"The authentication part is seamless and easy for people."
"The most valuable features are application filtering, content filtering, the intrusion prevention system (IPS), and definitely the application firewall."
"We like the solution’s protocol and its dashboard system."
"The technical support services are excellent."
"It is deployed on the customer site, and we manage the firewalls on this side."
"The tool's most valuable features are routing features and service quality."
"It has a good web cache. I used to use a DHCP server and DNS server. For my company, I use pfSense as a load balancing application."
"Technical support is perfect, excellent."
"I handle the scanning for the finance department. I recently encountered an issue with the PCL bills, our company bills. I resolved the matter, cleared the bill, and received calls regarding it using pfsense.The user interface is extremely user-friendly, which is why we use it across various plant sites. Our IT representatives at the plants find it easy to use and manage because of its straightforward interface."
"What I like about pfSense is that it works well and runs on an inexpensive appliance."
"I mostly like all of it. Whatever we use is valuable."
"My technicians find the pfSense's web interface very useful. It is very easy to use. pfSense is very reliable and stable. We like the OpenVPN clients that can be deployed using pfSense very much."
"Easy to deploy and easy to use."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The UI could be improved."
"There are some problems that support cannot give you a logical reason as to why it happened. For example, I had a case where I was dealing with a WhatsApp application that was giving issues. Technical support gave more than one reason it could be giving issues, but none of them solved the problem. Eventually I solved the problem, but it was far from the solutions that support had given."
"A couple of things I've seen that need improvement, especially in terms of a hard coding. The driver-level active moment really is out-of-the-box and we have to have contact the customer support and sometimes it is difficult to resolve."
"Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve to be on par with its competitors, such as Palo Alto and Sophos. They are the market leaders. Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve its capabilities. However, we are happy with Fortinet FortiGate."
"In some cases, its initial setup could be hard for customers."
"Stability and technical support are the two major issues I have found with Fortinet."
"The feedback that I have received is that the performance could be better, and the user experience is not as good compared to a previous solution we used. It could be more user-friendly. Of course, it still works fine for our operations."
"It should provide better visibility over the network and more information in the form of reports for the end users. Its installation should also be easier."
"The reporting can be improved."
"The solution can be improved by allowing automatic updates for the OS devices."
"There are too many types of licenses, which can be confusing."
"It could use more tutorials."
"The GUI really needs a lot of work, and it has got worse with successive version updates."
"The solution should consider improving its licensing policies."
"The tool's basic license does not cover everything. It needs to improve visibility and availability."
"They really need to improve the GUI."
"I would like to see pfSense integrate WireGuard. Currently, pfSense uses OpenVPN, and there's nothing wrong with it, but WireGuard is a lot leaner and meaner."
"This solution is good for small businesses but it is not as stable as other competitors such as Fortinet."
"It's just not listed as FIPS compliant for where we're at now in government, which is an issue."
"There's a bit of a learning curve during the initial implementation."
"We are at the moment looking to use it as a proxy service so that we can limit what websites people go and view and that sort of thing. That's an area I've struggled with a little bit at the moment and it could be a bit easier to set up."
"We have not had any problems with it, and we also do not have a need for any new features. If anything, its reporting can be better. Sophos has better reporting than pfSense. Sophos has more detailed information. pfSense is not as detailed. It is summarized."
"It needs to be more secure."
"They could improve their commercial stance and be more agile when it comes to the commercial pricing of enterprise deals."
Juniper vSRX is ranked 26th in Firewalls with 30 reviews while Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews. Juniper vSRX is rated 7.8, while Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Juniper vSRX writes "Fast with good usability and fairly scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". Juniper vSRX is most compared with Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, whereas Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, Sophos UTM, KerioControl and Cisco Secure Firewall. See our Juniper vSRX vs. Netgate pfSense 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.
