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."The security on offer is very good."
"Some of the key features of the solution is that it has good reporting, you can receive many details from the connection, for example, clients and website information."
"A strong point of FortiGate is the graphical interface is complete and easy to use."
"The GUI is good."
"What I like the most is the configuration and that it's simple, and straightforward to maintain."
"The UTM feature is quite good. FortiAP is easy to deploy because both Fortigate and FortiAP are under the same brand. Otherwise, you need to do more work on the configuration."
"The usage in general is pretty good."
"We have been able to offer several services to customers in a single box."
"The architecture of the OS in Juniper is very good. It's flexibility, scalability, and the technicality is also good."
"The product’s quality and performance are better than other vendors."
"Juniper is more flexible with the commit check and the commit confirmed command. The design of the forwarding and contract plan in the operating system is very important for the performance when we have very big traffic."
"There are a few valuable features that offer very good quality on the solution. Especially NetScreen. We used to use NetScreen for the the product line. It was a very mature solution, very robust, easy to configure, easy to manage, etc. It made it easy to do everything."
"The features we found most valuable are using the IDS and IPS during protection. The application filtering feature is great."
"The product's scalability is good, and my company has 150 users."
"The initial setup is pretty simple."
"The authentication part is seamless and easy for people."
"I especially like the VPN part. It works like a charm."
"We've found the stability to be very good overall."
"The solution is fairly scalable when it comes to integrating with other applications and data sets."
"The features I have found best are ease of use, GUI, and performance."
"Its reliability and cost-effectiveness stand out."
"The tools' most valuable feature is load balancing."
"Centralized administration with multiple services, which allows for execution in several important functionalities of information security."
"It is a stable solution. It is also easy to install and can be deployed and maintained by one team member."
"The solution is very expensive."
"I would like to see improvements in the product's application rules."
"If they had better integration with security products, such as Cisco ISE or Rapid Threat Containment, then it would be an improvement."
"The command line is complicated, and the interface could be better."
"Compared to some other products, the DLP is not at par for the moment."
"There is room for improvement related to the logging and reporting aspect."
"Some features of Fortinet FortiGate are actually fee enabled that are inconvenient for deploying in production. Other issues relate to isolation with Cisco products and your server."
"The performance could be a bit better. Right now, I find it to be lacking. Having good performance is very important for our work."
"The tool's basic license does not cover everything. It needs to improve visibility and availability."
"he stability could be improved."
"We have some weird errors and some weird behavior on the solution occasionally. The device gets buggy without anyone touching it. It would work and then suddenly stop. Sometimes you need to just move the cards out and restart it again, and it will work. The solution itself, the hardware and the software, there must be some bugs that need to be dealt with."
"There are too many types of licenses, which can be confusing."
"The pricing still needs some improvement."
"The solution's GUI needs improvement."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to the GUI because it isn't very good."
"It is pretty complex to manage and could be easier."
"The Netgate forums and community don’t provide extensive discussions and topics related to every pfSense service."
"Perhaps the documentation is not clear and because it is supported in the community there is no basic documentation."
"Could be simplified for new users."
"If a user doesn't have a large amount of experience in Linux systems, they will have problems using this solution. Users need to be highly skilled in troubleshooting competency. Users who do not have such skills will find the product difficult to use."
"It needs to be more secure."
"The user interface can be improved to make it easier to add more features. And pfSense could be better integrated with other solutions, like antivirus."
"There's a bit of a learning curve during the initial implementation."
"Netgate pfSense needs to improve the configuration for a VPN."
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.
