Compare Meraki MX vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls
 |
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros | |
"When you try to create an IP or when you have an alert about when a website is banned, these features are helpful." "The features we have found most valuable are the firewall and the monitoring tools." "A strong, reliable solution for small companies with little or no dedicated IT department." "We work also with domain control (DC) from Microsoft or Amazon. We use a whole virtual appliance with Meraki." "The internet traffic shaping has been very valuable." "The initial setup for me was straightforward." "Deployment takes no more than one working day." "I use Meraki in my POCs and with my customers as well." | "We standardized on the product and got rid of several other types of firewalls from different vendors." "It is very scalable." "The most valuable feature is the ability to deeply analyze the connection or connection type." "One of the things I really like about it is that we have the same features and functions available on the entry-level device (PA-220), as do large corporations with much more costly appliances." "One of the best firewalls on the market." "Good functionality and features." "The basic configuration will only take 15 minutes to set up" "The solution is very stable." |
Cons | |
"What I would like to see in the next version is to have more interfaces for WAN links." "FortiGate is cheaper than Meraki. Even the license renewal is less than Meraki." "The client-side VPN is weak. The product could be improved with deployment templates." "The problem is that the two licenses do not currently integrate. We have to create separate companies and do an interconnection." "The IPS, the Intrusion Prevention System, can be improved." "Right now, you can postpone the update but eventually, if you don't do the update, it will install the updates automatically for you and that's something that is not working for me." "Load balancing options and ability to manage a couple of Internet connections." "I need more UTM protection security features." | "I would like integration with Evident.io and RedLock." "The data loss prevention (DLP) capabilities need to be beefed up." "Overall it is good. It is reliable and easy to understand. However, the monitoring feature could be improved." "The initial configuration is complicated to set up." "The user interface is a bit clumsy and not very user-friendly." "Could also use better customer support." "Customers don't want to buy extra things for extra capabilities" "Generating reports is not so easy." |
Pricing and Cost Advice | |
"Pricing varies as per the type of license." "Meraki is also expensive, but it's a little bit less expensive and it's easier to configure than Cisco ASA." "The price varies depending on the hardware platform as well as the type of license and whether you're adding security or not." "The license cost depends on the box. We acquired a different product line. We are dealing with MX appliance now, that is, MX6, MX54, MX100, MX250, MX450. Every box has got an identity, and it has got its own specification. Every box has got a different license fee. We deployed Meraki MX in UAE when it was not a mature product. We took a risk, but we were successful. We saved a huge amount of money after implementing and removing all the MPLS and leased lines. We got a broadband connection because Meraki MX could work on a broadband connection. We have drastically saved a very good amount of money, which was one of the successful things apart from the successful solution." "Other content filtering solutions that I have used had more bells and whistles, but given the cost, complexity, and management overhead, I am very pleased with Meraki’s solution." "The price is slightly increased, but reasonable." "It is a good global solution in terms of the price and features, but because we sell this solution in dollars, sometimes we don't get to sell this solution in Brazil because the dollar is very expensive. The price of every project is different. It varies depending upon the project, scenario, and client." "The pricing could always be improved — especially with the shape the economy is in at the moment." | "Annually, the licensing costs are too much." "Pricing is yearly, but it depends. You could pay on a yearly basis, or every three years. If you want to add a device or two, there would be an additional cost. Also, if you want to do an assessment, or other similar add-on, you have to pay accordingly for the additional service." "It will be worth your time to hire a contractor to set it up and configure it for you, especially if you are not very knowledgeable with PA firewalls." "Don't buy a device with more power than you really need, because licensing depends on the cost of the box you have." "The licensing is annual, and there aren't any additional fees on top of that." "The price of this product should be reduced." "The pricing is competitive in the market." "This is an expensive product, which is why some of our customers don't adopt it." More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice » |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Unified Threat Management (UTM) solutions are best for your needs. 456,966 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |
Questions from the Community | |
Top Answer: definitely the FortiGate , I can assist you with configuration and support if needed .
| Top Answer: I have been working with Palo Alto for more than 5 years now and I think I have worked with almost every other firewall platform out there. Palo Alto is my go to firewall for several reasons: Always a… more » Top Answer: Pricewise Cisco. But PA has better rating. Top Answer: Palo Alto is the market leader and a company with a very holistic approach to security. Firewalls are its mainstream business, whereas Cisco basically known as a networking company is trying to be one… more » |
Ranking  | |
Views 45,132 Comparisons 36,739 Reviews 21 Average Words per Review 447 Rating 8.2 | Views 14,112 Comparisons 10,212 Reviews 32 Average Words per Review 592 Rating 8.4 |
Popular Comparisons | |
 Compared 35% of the time.  Compared 10% of the time. Compared 7% of the time.  Compared 7% of the time.  Compared 3% of the time. | Compared 23% of the time.  Compared 15% of the time.  Compared 15% of the time.  Compared 11% of the time.  Compared 4% of the time. |
Also Known As | |
| MX64, MX64W, MX84, MX100, MX400, MX600 | Palo Alto NGFW, Palo Alto Networks Next-Generation Firewall, Palo Alto Networks PA-Series |
Learn | |
| Cisco | Palo Alto Networks |
Overview | |
| With the proliferation of modern applications and mixed-use networks, host and port based security is no longer sufficient. Cisco Meraki's layer 7 "next generation" firewall, included in MX security appliances and every wireless AP, gives administrators complete control over the users, content, and applications on their network. | Palo Alto Networks' next-generation firewalls secure your business with a prevention-focused architecture and integrated innovations that are easy to deploy and use. Now, you can accelerate growth and eliminate risks at the same time. |
Offer | |
Learn more about Meraki MX | Learn more about Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls |
Sample Customers | |
| Hyatt, ONS | SkiStar AB, Ada County, Global IT Services PSF, Southern Cross Hospitals, Verge Health, University of Portsmouth, Austrian Airlines, The Heinz Endowments |
Top Industries | |
Comms Service Provider33% Pharma/Biotech Company13% Financial Services Firm13% Non Tech Company7% Comms Service Provider27% Computer Software Company22% Construction Company6% Retailer4% | Comms Service Provider20% Manufacturing Company13% Financial Services Firm13% Computer Software Company13% Comms Service Provider28% Computer Software Company23% Media Company5% Government4% |
Company Size | |
Small Business53% Midsize Enterprise25% Large Enterprise22% Small Business37% Midsize Enterprise30% Large Enterprise33% | Small Business43% Midsize Enterprise32% Large Enterprise25% |
Find out what your peers are saying about Meraki MX vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
456,966 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Meraki MX is ranked 3rd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 23 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 8th in Firewalls with 41 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Great SD-WAN solution. Manage multiple Meraki devices (security, switches, APs, Cameras) with a single pane of glass". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "The product stability and level of security are second to none in the industry". Meraki MX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA Firewall, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall, SonicWall NSA and Palo Alto Networks WildFire, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, Azure Firewall, pfSense and Check Point Virtual Systems. See our Meraki MX vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls report.
See our list of .
We monitor all Unified Threat Management (UTM) 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.