We performed a comparison between Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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."Offers good security and filtering."
"The threat prevention is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"Provides good firewall security and has great VPN features."
"FortiGate is very simple to manage and easy to use."
"Their reliability and their policy of pre-shipping replacements when a unit has failed."
"The stability and scalability of this solution are satisfactory. Its SD-WAN, VPN, and URL filtering features are very useful."
"It's a firewall that secures our internal network. I have been using it since 2013, and I find that most of the features are advanced, and very user friendly."
"Whenever we raise a complaint with FortiGate, their response and resolution times are minimal."
"We use it as a firewall at our head office and branches."
"The security features and the model collection are the most valuable."
"We think they have a good interface, the operating system is good, it's robust. It has plenty of great features, and the relation between the cost and benefits works for our business."
"It's a reliable firewall and very stable, for both the hardware and applications it is stable."
"The IPS functionality of Juniper SRX is useful in the telecom industry."
"The user interface is good."
"The solution's stability is very good."
"The scalability is fine."
"The most effective features of the solution for threat prevention are Layer 7 inspection, SSL decryption, IPS, and the web filtering profile."
"Using Palo Alto Networks Panorama, we were able to deploy a single point of management and visualization of the firewall infrastructure in cloud, on-premise and integrated with Azure to automate scale up. Its security features, i.e. anti-malware, threat prevention, URL Filtering, VPN, and antivirus are the most valuable. The ID-User integrated with AD and 2FA features are also very useful to provide secure access to servers and some users in the company. "
"They now know the details about their network traffic that they did not know before: Applications that they are using and some application they did not know they were using."
"I like the UI. Most things are accessible from the user interface and it is quite user-friendly. With respect to both VM-based firewalls and physical firewalls, it's easy to create updates."
"The solution strengthens our IT posture."
"In AWS, Palo Alto provides us a better view than flow logs for network traffic."
"Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is very easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the zero-trust security architecture."
"Fortinet FortiGate needs to improve the protection, it did not prevent us from being attacked. Additionally, Fortinet FortiGate could provide more features for WAF devices. I should not have to purchase two solutions, it would be a benefit to combine these features into one solution."
"I would like to see more advanced developments of a wireless controller in the future."
"It would be nice if FortiGate incorporated some built-in endpoint protection features. I would also like a built-in SOC dashboard for managing multiple Fortinet firewalls."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The debugging and troubleshooting has room for improvement."
"The logs need to be better. They need to be more visible and easier to access."
"We have an issue with hotel guest vouchers."
"In the next release, maybe the documentation on how to use this solution could be improved."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"The web interface on Juniper SRX is just a short conversion from Junos OS CLI; this is not very suitable for users with little expertise/"
"I would like to have a better web UI for administration. Juniper could simplify the web UI and make it more compatible with mobile devices."
"The solution isn't very granular or detailed."
"I think Juniper SRX should have a GUI. Some of the competitors are already implementing GUI for the firewall."
"We purchased three devices and all three have been replaced under RMA."
"We'd like to improve the stability and the kill rate."
"There are a lot of features that customers do not know about and I think that better documentation would help when it comes to learning how to use the product."
"It would be helpful if we had a direct number for the support manager or the supporting engineer. That would be better than having to email every time because there would be less wait."
"The command-line interface is something that some people struggle with and I think that they should have an option to go straight to the GUI."
"The disadvantage with Palo Alto is that they don't have a cloud-based solution that includes a secure web gateway."
"It is not very easy to scale up the solution."
"People are less aware of Palo Alto."
"It would be good if the common features work consistently in physical and virtual environments. There was an integration issue in the virtual deployment where it didn't report the interface counters, and we had to upgrade to the latest version, whereas the same thing has been working in the physical deployment for ages now. It seems that it was because of Azure. We were using VMware before, and we didn't have any such issues. We do see such small issues where we expect things to work, but they don't because of some incompatibilities. There also seems to be a limitation on how to do high availability in a virtualized environment. All features should be consistently available in physical and virtual environments. It is not always easy to integrate Palo Alto in the network management system. We would like to be able to compare two network management systems. They can maybe allow monitoring an interface through the GUI to create a reference or do a baseline check about whether your network monitoring system is actually giving you the correct traffic figures. You need traffic figures to be able to recognize the trends and plan the capacity."
"The reporting part of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We feel that the setup was complex. So, we asked the tech team about the setup process. They explained how to deploy it in the right way, which made it very simple."
Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 87 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 53 reviews. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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 Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and WatchGuard Firebox, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Huawei NGFW. See our Juniper SRX Series Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series report.
See our list of best Firewalls 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.