We performed a comparison between Check Point Remote Access VPN and Fortinet Forticlient based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Overall, users give Check Point Remote Access VPN higher ratings than Fortinet Forticlient because it offers more security, has good support available, and has proven to create a good ROI.
"It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"The solution has good performance."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN has some useful features, and configuring it is relatively straightforward."
"The IPSec VPN, Mobile Access, and Identity Awareness are three of the blades with which we have been working with since the pandemic. This has given us great mobility, making our network more dynamic."
"The solution is easy to install, centrally managed, and stable, with good technical support and a straightforward setup."
"It is easy to install the Endpoint Remote Access VPN client on different platforms."
"The most valuable feature is the seamless access."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN provides strong security features, including encryption, authentication, endpoint security, access control, and centralized management."
"The most important feature of Check Point Remote Access VPN is the multiple factor authentication."
"Organizations that already use the Check Point NGFW Solution do not require any additional hardware, which makes the implementation straightforward and reduces the time to go live."
"The Fortinet FortiClient is simple to use."
"FortiClient's most valuable features are that it's easy to install and connect and has OTP on email IDs and two-factor authentication."
"The most valuable feature is that it's easy to deploy. Deployment, configuration, and troubleshooting are very easy."
"The initial setup is very good."
"We like its centralized administration, integration with Active Directory, deployment, and stability of the connection."
"It is not at all interesting for me as a standalone product, but as a product that is integrated with FortiGate with all features, it is actually a great tool and a great experience. I had test installed FortiClient working from home. I remembered and knew which web categories were denied or allowed. All those policies were correctly reflected standalone, for example, on my laptop."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiClient is its performance."
"It's pretty stable, and I don't have any problems with it."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"Sometimes the application slows down the computing device, and this affects workflows."
"The provisioning of VPN users has room for improvement."
"The main area for improvement is pricing. Another area could be integrating MFA authentication directly into the solution instead of using separate benchmark tools for implementation."
"Check Point Remote Access VPN could be more user-friendly."
"For Linux machines, they don't have a full client to install. For the users that utilize Linux, there needs to be an equivalent."
"In the case of URL translation of the VPN Web portal, the requests made from the front end to the back end weren't valid (due to the use of dynamic subdomains). In the case of host translations, the request was made to the same host, however, we cannot specify the ports, which, in our case, are used to redirect to different servers."
"The scalability needs improvement."
"Improvements for Check Point Remote Access VPN could include enhancing mobile connectivity for a smoother user experience."
"I don't think FortiClient is bad, but it's very buggy. We ran into some issues with the EMS, which amounted to more than 10 cases last year."
"The user interface could be more inviting."
"We would like Fortinet to add the function or the possibility to use all FortiClient features for free."
"Occasionally, the solution may provide a slow connection. In addition, there may be initialization and authorization issues that one may need to take care of while using the solution."
"Everybody else is doing AI, machine learning, self-healing, next-generation features. It needs more next-generation features. Everybody else is doing AI, machine learning, self-healing, next-generation features. It needs more next-generation features."
"There is lagging in some of the authentication tools to support the newer versions, this is happening because they are not supported."
"One area that could be improved is cost, but you've got to pay for what you get."
"The solution could add data to the endpoint."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 6th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 62 reviews while Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 86 reviews. Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8, while Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Check Point Remote Access VPN writes "Is easy to use and has a nice interface, but the scalability needs to improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Check Point Harmony Mobile, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange and Symantec VIP Access Manager, whereas Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway and Citrix Gateway. See our Check Point Remote Access VPN vs. Fortinet FortiClient report.
See our list of best Enterprise Infrastructure VPN vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.