We performed a comparison between Fortinet Fortigate vs. WatchGuard Firebox based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Fortinet FortiGate came out ahead of WatchGuard because of its stronger support and better pricing.
"The product is very stable, easy to troubleshoot, and configure, so it has reduced the time it takes for support."
"The UTM feature is quite good. FortiAP is easy to deploy because both Fortigate and FortiAP are under the same brand. Otherwise, you need to do more work on the configuration."
"It is user friendly, and has all the features you need."
"Allows for firewall rules to be programmed and named in a way that makes it “readable”"
"The management console is pretty simple, so anyone who understands networking can initially deploy the solution."
"The payment function for applications is good."
"The solution is very user friendly. The user interface in particular is quite nice."
"Fortinet FortiGate protects against internet-based threats, both internal and external. It is scalable, stable, easy to use, and easy to install."
"I like their management features a lot. Their System Manager server as well the System Manager software make managing them, and tracking changes, very easy and complete."
"Simple to move settings between WatchGuard boxes."
"The throughput is great. It's perfect. We have no issues whatsoever. The management features are very powerful..."
"The GUI is easy and intuitive."
"As a whole, it has a very low requirement for ongoing interaction. It's very self-sufficient. If properly patched, it has very high reliability. The total cost of ownership once deployed is very low."
"I have found the DNS Watch feature for intrusion and prevention response and APT Locker most valuable to me."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the FireWall features. The management side of WatchGuard is quite easy because it supports two ways to manage it - by the web and the other one they call WatchGuard systems manager. I used to be familiar with WSM only, but they improved their GUI in the web browser and now it is much easier to do it within the web browser."
"Management and visibility are the most valuable features."
"One issue that I have had is that sometimes I need to monitor the traffic, so I need to filter it according to the user and which user is using it the most. I experience a bottleneck most of the time, particularly at the peak time when the number of contracts and users are at maximum."
"They should make the rule sets more understandable for the end user. When you're trying to explain to somebody how a computer network is secured, sometimes it's difficult for an end user or customer to understand. If there was a way to make the terminology more accessible to the end user, the set up could be easier. They should translate the technical jargon to an easily relatable and understandable conversation for the end user, the customer, that would be brilliant. Particularly in an environment where the IT structure is audited regularly, there's always pressure from the auditor to up the standards and up the security and you get your USCERT's that come out and there's a warning about this and the customer will want to lock out so much and when you apply it they run into issue where they can't search the internet or print to their remote office. Of course they can't print to your remote office, they just locked it up. They should make the language more understandable for the customer. If there's a product out there that made the jargon understandable to John Q. Public, I would buy that."
"The support we receive when we need to upgrade is not satisfactory and has room for improvement."
"Fortinet should focus on enhancing the capabilities of FortiGate by consolidating its various products, such as FortiGate Cloud, FortiManager, and FortiAnalyzer."
"It is stable, but its stability can be improved."
"The Web-filter in this solution is not very good."
"Monitoring and reporting could be better."
"I would like to see improvements in the product's application rules."
"The way Secure Sign-On authentication is happening needs to be improved. When the Secure Sign-On portal is turned on, anybody who comes into the campus, whether he or she is a staff member or a guest, has to go past the initial portal. One of the shortcomings is the username. It shouldn't allow permutations or combinations with upper or lower cases. For example, when there is a username abc, it shouldn't allow ABC or Abc. It should not allow the same username, but currently, two separate people can go in. Therefore, its authentication or validation should be improved, and the case sensitiveness should be picked up. If I have restricted someone to two devices, they shouldn't be able to use different combinations of the same username and get into the third or fourth device. It shouldn't allow different combinations of alphabets to be used to log in."
"This is a great product and offers great protection but they don't hear the customers' needs. They don't make improvements as per the customers' requests."
"There is a slight learning curve."
"Websense is an application that monitors and filters internet traffic. Websense was derived from WatchGuard. But when you go to WatchGuard to actually implement that particular feature, you have to use some type of additional feature and you have to pay for it, unfortunately. I think it should be free or free in the WatchGuard box itself, as an option. It would be nice if they didn't charge us for that."
"Sometimes I would like to copy a rule set from one box to another box in a direct way. This is a feature that is not present at the moment in WatchGuard."
"We bought Firebox four or five years ago, and with the first version I had to reboot it every two or three months for no apparent reason. We upgraded last year to the M370 and it's been running, but it is rebooting from time to time. I don't know why."
"When working with WatchGuard, specifically in configuring Panda Security on the portal for the first time, it was challenging for me."
"Its documentation could be improved. Sometimes, you need to search a bit longer to find what you are looking for."
Fortinet FortiGate is ranked 2nd in Firewalls with 306 reviews while WatchGuard Firebox is ranked 13th in Firewalls with 79 reviews. Fortinet FortiGate is rated 8.4, while WatchGuard Firebox is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiGate writes "It's a reliable solution that's easy to install and cheaper than competitors ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Firebox writes "Offers a streamlined deployment, intuitive interface and robust security features". Fortinet FortiGate is most compared with Sophos XG, Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Meraki MX and Check Point NGFW, whereas WatchGuard Firebox is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, OPNsense, SonicWall TZ and Meraki MX. See our Fortinet FortiGate vs. WatchGuard Firebox 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.
Even though my experience with FortiGate products has been mostly positive, I am partial to the WatchGuard appliances. I find the FortiGate interface a bit odd. For example, some of the wizards within the interface make me feel like it is more of a consumer device, even though I know it is a very capable appliance. The WatchGuard interface is more complicated, but it is also more capable. I also find that the UTM features within the FortiGate products lack some of the granular control available with WatchGuard.
I believe WatchGuard is the better choice regarding the quality of support, available documentation, and training resources.
I see that another reviewer indicated that WatchGuard lacked application control features. That is incorrect. Although I do not use this feature in any of my environments, I assure you that the features are available, and my testing has shown it to be capable.
WatchGuard appliances also can integrate their endpoint Threat Detection and Response client to an environment for a correlated view of the environment.
WatchGuard also offers multiple methods for managing an appliance. Although the GUI is very capable, I am not a fan of live changes to an appliance. There are instances when multiple changes must be made to achieve the desired outcome. When these circumstances arise, the WatchGuard Policy Manager software allows you to deploy multiple changes at once while maintaining an OH SH!T copy that you can quickly redeploy if you happen to make a mistake.
When it hits the fan, and you must troubleshoot an appliance issue, WatchGuard is far superior to any firewall I have worked with, including Fortigate. The ability to quickly and easily adjust the policies' order of precedence is a huge advantage and can often save a great deal of time troubleshooting.
Please do not take this as a negative review of FortiGate products. I am only speaking about firewalls. I have not used any of the other FortiGate products. I am strictly speaking of my experience deploying and managing FortiGate and WatchGuard firewalls. From my experience, I find the WatchGuard a superior product.
As a Managed Service Provider, our preferred product is WatchGuard, with our second offering being the Fortigate. We managed other firewall brands, but we only sell WatchGuard and FortiGate products under normal circumstances. There are exceptions based on the client's needs. For example, CradlePoint devices are often the best solutions for a client that only has cellular connectivity as an option. I only point out this situation because FortiGate is now offering LTE/5G solutions. We have many rural clients and moving forward, this may impact what we recommend. Unfortunately, at this time, I don't have enough knowledge to offer any intelligent input on these product offerings, only that they are on our radar.
In my organization, we use Fortinet’s Fortigate. We find it to be very powerful, cost-efficient, and reliable. The user interface is friendly, and it is easy to create policies and set rules. As an NGFW, you can upgrade the firewall cluster firmware without disturbing the user. The graphic interface is very intuitive. The endpoint and email protection are on point, and you don’t have to worry about downtime.
FortiGate offers malware and spyware protection, with advanced capabilities like proxy-based antivirus. It has advanced network protection features and a powerful intrusion prevention system with anti-spam and web filtering capabilities. For all the capabilities it offers, the price is reasonable.
FortiGate has downsides though: the technical support is not great, and there is not a lot of documentation available. It is also kind of hard to configure.
We reviewed WatchGuard before choosing FortiGate. WatchGuard offers a comprehensive advanced network security platform with enterprise-grade security. The router is rich in security features like antivirus, APT blocker, and spam blocker. It is simple to use and applicable for various use cases. It offers web filtering, application control, and monitoring.
We liked that the GUI interface seemed intuitive and easy to use. It integrates with Active Directory, so it is a good fit for MS enterprise users. You can also schedule backups with ease.
WatchGuard is, however, lacking in features for application control and we found the DNS server functionality to be poor. The firewall policies don’t point to a domain, only to IP addresses. While it is excellent that it integrates with Active Directory, the single-sign-on sometimes doesn’t refresh users’ permissions when they log on and off.
Conclusion
Fortinet Fortigate is undoubtedly a powerful and established next-generation firewall, and with all the features and capabilities, it is a better and more cost-effective solution than WatchGuard. WatchGuard would be better for organizations that use MS products.