We performed a comparison between Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Juniper SRX Series Firewall is highly regarded for its simplicity, intuitive interface, and exceptional customer assistance. It provides advantageous capabilities, including site-to-site VPN, effortless configuration, and a robust command line. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls excel in embedded machine learning, formidable security functionalities, and a cohesive platform. They present features such as application identification, DNS security, URL filtering, and GlobalProtect VPN.
Juniper SRX Series Firewall could enhance its capacity, reporting and alerts, user interface, device reliability, documentation, and feature set. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls would benefit from improved customization, configuration simplicity, machine learning capabilities, troubleshooting tools, documentation, user interface, VPN availability, and product stability.
Service and Support: Customers have generally found the customer service of Juniper SRX Series Firewall to be satisfactory, with helpful and knowledgeable support. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls have received mixed feedback, as some customers have praised the support while others have expressed dissatisfaction.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Juniper SRX Series Firewall is time-consuming, varying based on the environment's complexity. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls are known for their simplicity and ease of use. Palo Alto is considered more user-friendly and has a quicker deployment time.
Pricing: The setup cost for Juniper SRX Series Firewall is seen as simple, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls are considered to be more expensive than other vendors. Juniper's pricing is fair and within budget, while Palo Alto's pricing is justified considering the level of security and features offered.
ROI: Juniper SRX Series Firewall is praised for its reliability, consistent performance, and advanced security capabilities, which ultimately lead to a favorable return on investment. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls excel in providing better visibility, detailed reporting, and streamlined management, resulting in decreased administrative burden.
Comparison Results: Based on the comparison between Juniper SRX Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, it is evident that users prefer Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. This is due to its embedded machine learning for real-time attack prevention, strong security capabilities, and a unified platform that offers ease of use and maintenance. Users appreciate the advanced security features and user-friendly interface.
"The GUI is good."
"The inspection and web security features are most valuable."
"Its performance in fulfilling our requirements has been satisfactory."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the SD-WAN and their IP4 policy."
"Fortinet FortiGate is a stable solution."
"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."
"Overall, the pricing of the solution is very good. The product offers good value."
"The wireless control is helpful."
"It's a reliable firewall and very stable, for both the hardware and applications it is stable."
"Juniper supports their products very well."
"It protects the data behind our switches."
"What I like the most about Juniper is that they have the same CLI on all routers, switches, and firewalls. If you have worked with any Juniper device, such as a Juniper router, you will be able to work with an SRX, which is really cool. It is a nice experience to work with every device of Juniper, not only firewalls."
"Technical support is perfect."
"Juniper SRX is a very powerful firewall and sometimes can be used as a router."
"It protects from distributed denial-of-service attacks with Screen Options."
"The reason that we picked Juniper SRX is for the scalability, the fit for purpose, the tools that are available, the ongoing support and the ability to monitor, but particularly for the virtual routers in our data centers so that we can quickly upscale them when needed, when we need more throughput."
"URL filtering and WildFire features are most valuable. It is very user-friendly. It is a very solid product, and it definitely works."
"The application IDs, application controls, URL filtering, visibility, monitoring, and reporting are the most valuable features."
"I like that they are more stable than the previous ones, and they allow a lot of other features."
"Most of the features in Palo Alto are very valuable."
"The feature that I like the most is its IPS model, the WildFire model. I really like how the whole threat protection model functions, including the vulnerability and anti-spyware aspects. That is really awesome."
"There are many valuable features, such as wireless cloud features."
"The most valuable feature is WildFire, which blocks sophisticated attacks and distinguishes it from other traditional firewall functions."
"I have found it to be reliable and very easy to use. I haven't really encountered many problems with it because its documentation is clear and readily available on their website."
"The feedback that I have received is that the performance could be better, and the user experience is not as good compared to a previous solution we used. It could be more user-friendly. Of course, it still works fine for our operations."
"The support from Fortinet FortiGate could improve. They are not easily accessible when we need them. They could improve their response time."
"There are just some services that aren't available. For example, the Ethernet or point-to-point protocols. They could add these services to their product offering - especially services for ISPs."
"In the future, I would like to see improvements made to cloud-based management."
"I would prefer to have more detailed logs within the FortiGate products themselves rather than relying on a separate tool."
"Usually, we sell the bundle with the UTM or threat management piece with IPS, IDS. Other providers, such as Palo Alto, are ahead in terms of safe functionality. So, for me, delivering truly safe service is probably something that still needs to be improved."
"We would like to have the ability to disable some of the security functionalities."
"It should be more stable. There should be full integration within Fortinet products themselves as well as with other third-party products. Especially when you're not dealing with SIEM and the correlation of the security box, we want Fortinet to be able to share that information with as many other products as it can."
"I think Juniper SRX should have a GUI. Some of the competitors are already implementing GUI for the firewall."
"Juniper SRX could improve by adding an IPX feature."
"The pricing strategy of the vendor could improve."
"Both the web management and the graphical user interface are inadequate and should be improved."
"Juniper SRX Series Firewall has to improve its web content site, like web filtration."
"In terms of other features, I'd like to see a web filter, 10 point control, application control and a DNA filter in the next release."
"The Juniper SRX product needs to improve in terms of innovation."
"It was very difficult to deal with and required a lot of support, and the UI is very poor."
"The initial configuration is complicated to set up."
"The only downside of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, in my opinion, is the relatively higher price compared to Cisco FortiGate. This is especially noticeable when deploying basic configurations and considering the cost of licenses."
"PA-220 Next-Generation Firewall would be perfect if it has spam filtering."
"It's not so easy to scale out your security capabilities."
"I would like them to bring in some features that would encourage traffic shaping or bandwidth routing, like other UTM firewalls, because the solution should be capable of limiting the bandwidth for rules."
"The pricing could be improved. They need to work on the setup over the firewall, VLAN, and PPPoE."
"The tool's central management system is complicated, making it challenging to manage multiple devices centrally. Individually, the firewalls are easy to use and manage. I'd like to see better central management features in the next release. They've introduced some, but I haven't tried them yet, so I can't say how effective they are. However, having a single management interface would be a big improvement."
"The solution doesn't support routing in virtual firewall creation, and we want that to be enabled."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 87 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 164 reviews. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls 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 NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Check Point NGFW and Meraki MX, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Sophos XGS. See our Juniper SRX Series Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls 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.