We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiClient and Perimeter 81 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Infrastructure VPN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has good performance."
"It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"FortiClient's most valuable features are that it's fast and safe."
"It’s really easy to use."
"The connection speed is fast. I can connect quickly at any time, and there are never any interruptions to the FortiClient connection. I could easily code into the client's server with that connection, with no lag."
"The most valuable feature is the single pane of glass, single point of management."
"The VPN connection is the feature that I like the most."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiClient is dual authentication and the VPN is secure."
"It is very powerful."
"We like its centralized administration, integration with Active Directory, deployment, and stability of the connection."
"It helps to quickly get access to the pages I need."
"It keeps us all accountable and ensures secure internet connections while we all work remotely."
"The benefits are really built into the underlying protocol, however, Perimeter81 makes these available in a user-friendly way."
"Perimeter 81 has increased my security and privacy while maintaining solid internet performance."
"It connects quickly and stays connected. The user interface is pretty neat too. The app has in-house support with user guides that give you step-by-step walkthroughs on navigating the app. In addition, there is a live chat feature that offers prompt assistance on the go."
"Providing access and security allows our company employees to work from home and remotely."
"SD-WAN is one of the primary solutions offered by Perimeter 81."
"It is a scalable solution."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"Fortinet FortiClient could improve the connection because sometimes it drops."
"One area that could be improved is cost, but you've got to pay for what you get."
"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."
"I heard that Fortinet is going to enhance the firmware to have mobile versions. One is like Linux long-term support SCS and one with new features, but there is no support here. We spoke with the vendor multiple times, and they said that they will release these features soon."
"Fortinet FortiClient could improve the compatibility with mobile applications that are allowed and sometimes they do not respond. However, Microsoft Windows applications are very good."
"We'd like to be able to properly encrypt the data more effectively."
"FortiClient's encryption key could be stronger so that it's not broken too easily."
"The solution's access control could be improved."
"What would be useful would be a notification/warning that a session is due to timeout after exceeding the default connection limit."
"There is a very small amount of downtime."
"If I were to be nitpicky, I would ask that Perimeter 81 offer the option for us to change the color of the graphical user interface, like maybe pink or green or so on."
"It would be nice to have a notification sound when Perimeter81 disconnects, as I sometimes don't notice when the icon shows that it's disconnected, and I end up wasting time waiting for my browser to load a page that shows an error, usually error 404."
"One of our challenges is ensuring the security of our cloud-based operations."
"Currently, I am not able to define a different country or location, which can result in negative experiences as the tool is being recognized by websites and this can make it difficult to access them or force me to disable the program temporarily."
"The overall UI could be improved and updated to bring a simpler feel to the application."
"In order to have to bypass the login using the website, a good feature for Perimeter 81 to have is a login instance in the Perimeter 81 application. I'm using a Mac and we don't have that functionality."
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 86 reviews while Perimeter 81 is ranked 8th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 22 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Perimeter 81 writes "Great SAML and SCIM support with the ability to deploy site-2-site tunnels with specific IP restrictions". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, whereas Perimeter 81 is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cloudflare Access and Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Perimeter 81 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.