We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and Sophos XG based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Sophos XG received better user ratings. Although the two solutions are comparable in most areas, Meraki MX lacks a lot of features in comparison with Sophos XG.
"We can use our devices to check all of the perimeters. It secures email websites."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"It is quite easy to handle."
"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."
"It has improved our organization with control data."
"Their interface is very easy to use, it is without bugs."
"The email protection and VPN features are the most valuable."
"The security features are about the best that I've seen anywhere."
"I think cloud management is key. The cloud management and support are the two things that make the product great."
"We switched to Meraki because it lets you see what's happening in your LAN and WAN in a graphic and web environment."
"It has very good features; it's easy to use, configure, set up, and deploy."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"Meraki MX offers advanced filtration options, plus it behaves like a router and a firewall at the same time."
"I am happy with the technical support for the solution. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."
"The solution's most valuable feature is the Meraki dashboard, which is a single pane of glass."
"WAN optimization is the best feature of the solution."
"I've tried out Sophos XG a little. It has a good interface that's very user-friendly, but I haven't used all of its functions because I'm only configuring and running the system."
"We've deployed quite a number for our users and our customers, and the feedback is quite positive in terms of management and also administration."
"Content filtering and intrusion prevention are most valuable. Our customers are fully satisfied with the performance of Sophos. It has all the features that they require in a firewall."
"Web filtering is easy enough to deploy, manage, or make exceptions to."
"So far, I'm happy that they have recently added a firewall role, so I feel a little more comfortable with the security. The threat management is good."
"The most valuable feature is the Intercept X. It is the advanced features that are used for malware detection, and antivirus."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"I like how you can integrate with other endpoints and Intercept X in one central management platform. I think it's a perfect solution. Sophos will manage everything in one container. You can manage many firewalls or endpoints within one panel."
"The way everything is set up could be easier. Currently, people need a lot of experience and knowledge to administer it and to link it to devices."
"It would be ideal if they had some sort of GUI interface for troubleshooting and diagnostics."
"It would be nice if FortiGate incorporated some built-in endpoint protection features. I would also like a built-in SOC dashboard for managing multiple Fortinet firewalls."
"They sometimes hide some features and if you want to enable them, you have to go in the CLI, enable the feature and configure it through the CLI. Customers, typically, like everything to be done by the GUI."
"With the reports, you can see it, and you can get good feelings so upper management can go, "Oh, wow. That looks pretty." However, it's very basic."
"For the migration, everyone has a firewall in use and I am selling Fortinet. Typically, I am replacing another firewall. Previously, there was a tool available to convert configurations from one firewall, such as Palo Alto, to Fortinet, but this tool is no longer free. If it could be made free again, it would be very beneficial."
"I would like to have logs, monitoring, and reporting for a month without extra fees."
"It needs more available central management."
"Management can be improved in Meraki MX."
"In general, the SD-WAN feature needs to be improved. The load sharing and load balancing of the traffic should be improved. I have had some problems with these features in the past."
"It would be nice if the different services, including the SIEM SOC and endpoint detection and response (EDR) were integrated into one, so that I don't have to go to different vendors for different services."
"What I would like to see in the next version is to have more interfaces for WAN links."
"From the improvement perspective, we need more monitoring capabilities. We want to have full-based access visibility, such as, what is happening when something is trying to reach and it is denying. We cannot see some parts of it. The integration of active directory with this product is not very fruitful. It has some bugs or lacks in the functionality of active directory integration. We are unable to identify where exactly and whether it has really applied our policy."
"Expensive licensing and firewall stops immediately working if the license is not renewed at expiration date."
"I do not have the kind of feature I need for SSL decryption in Meraki MX. It would be great to see the SSL decryption feature in Meraki MX."
"Could possibly use deeper configurations."
"The VPN features can be improved. Due to covid-19, we have a lot of employees that work from home and we need better VPN capabilities."
"The reporting could be improved in this solution by adding more details."
"Sophos XG could improve Data Loss Prevention(DLP)."
"I've had experience with Sophos XG's threat intelligence features, and they provide good coverage, although I wouldn't say they're the best in the industry. The sandbox feature is available with top-tier subscriptions, allowing you to test content in a cloud sandbox. One improvement I'd suggest for Sophos XG is to make certain functionalities, like CR functionality, part of the default firewalling rather than exclusive to premium subscriptions. Enhancing DLP capabilities at the gateway level could significantly boost security for organizations."
"I would like to next release to be able to support on-premise deployment. The construction of the rules within the firewall could also use some improvement."
"The reaction time of the GUI is terrible when compared to other manufacturers."
"We encounter difficulties while navigating through certain features and functionalities of the product."
"The first area that needs to be improved is customer support."
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 58 reviews while Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while Sophos XG is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Easy to use and deploy with an improved pricing structure in place". Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, SonicWall TZ, Netgate pfSense and SonicWall NSa, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Sophos XGS, SonicWall TZ and Sophos UTM. See our Meraki MX vs. Sophos XG 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.
Meraki is designed for zero deployments and no in-house firewall specialist personnel. Best to secure Networks like remote offices, branches or home offices. Also to protect Internet Access (your computer accesses the internet).
Sophos is more of a professional firewall, not only protecting internet access but also providing security for publishing services like web servers, data centers, central services. They will need a specialist to install and support them. Therefore offer much more sophisticated protection features.
So, you can't really compare these solutions as they are targeting different markets.
Meraki MX is a small business product and lacks a lot of features compared to Sophos XG/XGS.
- IPsec IKEv2 does not work (it is in the menu, but does not work and can only be enabled by meraki support)
- no SSLVPN or IPsec VPN client. AnyConnect can only be tested with beta firmware.
Cisco Client VPN (L2TP) is a total joke - not sure for who it is meant for?
- no user based firewall rules (for VPN)
- no firewall rule grouping
- no masquerade option for DNAT (sometimes it is very useful if I can do a DNAT with masquerade to another subnet)
- no VLAN tagging support on WAN port (would be usable for IPTV - solvable if WAN is bypassed through a managed switch)
- no multiple IP support on WAN port (Sophos has alias support on every interface, which means that multiple IP addresses can be added on the same LAN or WAN port)
- no LAG or LACP support (would be usable to connect aggregation switch to firewall to bypass more traffic through the MX)
- no DAC cable support for SFP port (why I do have to use optical cable to connect aswitch?)
- no custom IPS policies - only on/off button
- no e-mail protection option (Sophos has it with extra license)
- no web server protection (Sophos has it with extra license)
- no sandstorm option (most firewalls have it with extra license)
- hardware may probably too weak compared to the user count
- no BGP, OSPF routing
- no multiple VPN user groups and LDAP servers
Cisco mx64, for example, has 2 WANs, is very practical and simple for the two services, has a balancing for two internet services and bandwidth control (by groups and users).