We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks and pfSense based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: pfSense has an edge in this comparison as it is a free, open-source solution while Palo Alto Networks is considered expensive by its users.
"The notable features that I have found most valuable are that it includes the antivirus, and also IPS, and even SD-WAN."
"Their proxy-based inspection is responsive and secure."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is load balancing. It can provide central management and VPNA. Additionally, it has enhanced our security environment."
"Overall security features and performance routing is good."
"The main reason why I purchased the particular unit was that it had good reviews and what other people were saying as far as its completeness and its leading capabilities in terms of endpoint security was very good."
"Whenever we raise a complaint with FortiGate, their response and resolution times are minimal."
"I have found Fortinet FortiGate to be scalable."
"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."
"Some of the terminologies were more familiar to me than it was when I first encountered Cisco."
"Stability has been excellent. We have experienced no issues; it never fails."
"I like pfSense's security features."
"Firewall system for small, medium, and large data networks. It allows you to provide security to your environment: DMZ networks, LAN, WAN, etc."
"The GUI is easy to understand."
"The solution is very robust."
"The ability to perform packet captures on the command line and via the GUI is useful for diagnosing problems."
"The most valuable feature, for instance, is the ease of migrating configurations between different Netgate devices housed in the same box."
"This is arguably the best security protection that you can buy."
"The application awareness feature that recognizes application IDs and vulnerability protection are Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls' most valuable features."
"Provision of quality training material and the reporting is very good."
"The best feature is the packet inspection; compared to solutions like Cisco and FortiGate, Palo Alto's packet inspection is much less CPU intensive, allowing it to detect threats embedded within packages more quickly and efficiently."
"The payload is a very valuable feature."
"Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls provide a unified platform that natively integrates all security capabilities."
"In my opinion, Palo Alto has consistently been one of the best firewalls for enterprise security."
"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."
"The solution could be more secure and stable."
"MTBF: Hardware failure is more common when compared to SonicWall or Cisco ASA."
"I would like to see improvements in the product's application rules."
"FortiGate support could do some improvements on their IPv6 configuration. Right now it's still in the very early stage for utilizing in an enterprise level network environment."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding FortiAnalyzer to its solution, we should not have to use another solution. FortiAnalyzer can provide more detailed information."
"I don't like that anything more than very basic reporting is not included."
"The security of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"Difficult to add or define, and not that easy to configure and manage."
"I would like to see multiple DNS servers running on individual interfaces."
"pfSense could improve by having a sandboxing feature that I have seen in SonicWall. However, maybe it is available I am not aware of it."
"I would like to see SD1 integration into the software. That would be fantastic."
"There are several levels of firewall configuration such as beginner, advanced, and expert configurations. At each level, it becomes more complex and more tricky to set up the firewall. For example, if you want to install the firewall on your computer system, it would be a lot easier if it just tells you that this is the internet NIC and this is the Wi-Fi NIC."
"The solution could use better reporting. They need to offer more of it in general. Right now, the graphics aren't the best. If you need to provide a report to a manager, for example, it doesn't look great. They need to make it easier to understand and give users the ability to customize them."
"They can improve the dynamic of the input of IPs from outside."
"It requires more attention to provide a better alternative for open source to small government or educational institutions with reduced budgets in terms of technology."
"This product needs improvements with respect to reporting and auditing."
"Palo Alto is like Microsoft. It has varied features, but it's too technical. A lot of the features could be simplified. The procedure, process, features, and usability could be more simple."
"Palo Alto should improve their support. It's sometimes difficult to get the right technician or engineer to fix the problem as soon as possible."
"The solution could offer better pricing. We'd like it if it could be a bit more affordable for us."
"The configuration part could be improved. It's very difficult to configure. It doesn't have a user-friendly interface. You have to know Palo Alto deeply to use it."
"It's too expensive."
"The solution would benefit from having a dashboard."
"Palo Alto needs to provide more support during the design phase and with proposals. They need to be more proactive, try to anticipate issues, and then help us to implement the transformation quickly."
"Technical support could be faster."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 164 reviews. Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". Netgate pfSense is most compared with OPNsense, Sophos XG, KerioControl, Sophos UTM and Check Point NGFW, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Cisco Secure Firewall. See our Netgate pfSense vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls 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.