We performed a comparison between Cisco SD-WAN and Citrix SD-WAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's very easy to manage and monitor the network's health and security using the solution."
"The solution can scale. We haven't had any issues doing so."
"Cisco SD-WAN has separate OMP routing."
"This solution can scale from SMB to the enterprise level. It is very impressive."
"One of the most valuable features is that they have multiple SD-WAN options: you have Meraki for simple management solutions, you have Viptela, and you have the option of having any type of WAN interfaces. Presently, you can also have a single combined solution for both WAN as well as for voice, so you can have a voice bundle as well. These are major unique points of this solution."
"With other routing protocols, we have had to send team members to perform installations and configurations. There is a lot of work involved. However with SD-WAN, once it is installed it is fully automated, and we can do all other tasks remotely. We don't have to send staff out to the client's location. It's very independent, and we can establish SD-WAN connectivity easily. It is secure as well."
"It is very simple and easy to manage, compared to other methods."
"The availability of services and combining different connections is most valuable."
"The tool is quite cost-effective because it replaces the need for MPLS, which is a bit expensive...Citrix SD-WAN doesn't need much maintenance."
"It allows us to use additional VPNs, offering more options compared to other VPN solutions."
"It lowered our Internet costs and gave me the flexibility to choose providers based on each location's connectivity."
"The VPN and the load balancing are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of Citrix SD-WAN is customization. You are able to customize the solution to your needs."
"The reliability of connectivity is most valuable."
"The scalability and stability are quite good in general."
"Downtime for branch offices is now almost zero. We have 100% real-time visibility into all of our lines. MPLS links have been replaced with lower-cost links, saving a larger percentage of line costs. Overall, I see SD-WAN as a must. And the Citrix SD-WAN product has delivered on expectations and exceeded them. (With later firmware updates we now have good firewall capabilities in the product too)."
"It is the best solution that I ever had, but there might be something better than this in the future."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The security features could be improved."
"The initial setup is complex and can be improved."
"When you buy the equipment, they should already put it into your cloud account. It should already be set up so that we can manage with vBond. We came across an issue where it wasn't resolved in the DNS. We are using Umbrella, so we need to create a VPN IPSec tunnel to Umbrella to enable the users to browse. I would really like to see an internal built-in firewall so that we don't have to go to Umbrella. This functionality might already be there. We are quite new to this solution, and we are still learning about it."
"Compresson deduplication should be added."
"In the next release, Cisco should focus on simplifying the configuration of SD-WAN. SD-WAN has a lot of room to grow."
"What I find should be improved is the possibility of really separating the software layer from the hardware layer since today the current offer is not well adopted by the service providers"
"Even though the monitoring is pretty good, there is some room for improvement there."
"There are a few things that can be improved, are domain-based routing and the slowness of virtual parts, and it may be due to the wrong configuration, which we have been unable to find out."
"Enhancements are needed to improve the stability."
"Overall, network security and next-generation firewall features are areas that they can improve on."
"The price could be improved, it's an expensive solution."
"The communication around the life cycle would have been really helpful. The main issue we have had is related to the life cycle because some of the things that we are using were discontinued. They were discontinued within a year after we had purchased it, which is a bit painful. If we had known that, we would've made some other decisions."
"The reports need to be improved. We need to have them customized but they don't have that right now. I would like for them to have better system predictions. We don't have that right now. My system may be working fine right now but after making some changes, that can change."
"Citrix SD-WAN's knowledge base has a few missing things, so you may need to seek help from support."
Cisco SD-WAN is ranked 1st in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 86 reviews while Citrix SD-WAN is ranked 9th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 21 reviews. Cisco SD-WAN is rated 8.0, while Citrix SD-WAN is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco SD-WAN writes "A solution for integrating services to enhance up-time, performance and lower costs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Citrix SD-WAN writes " A scalable solution for MCN controller but lacks technical supports, upgrades". Cisco SD-WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki SD-WAN, VMware SD-WAN, Juniper Session Smart Router and VMware NSX, whereas Citrix SD-WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Steelhead, Meraki SD-WAN, Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform and Cato SASE Cloud Platform. See our Cisco SD-WAN vs. Citrix SD-WAN report.
See our list of best Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions vendors and best WAN Edge vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions 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.
