Comparison conclusions:
pfSense offers paid options for additional support and features (pfSense Plus), a wider range of features and a larger community, but might have a steeper learning curve.
OPNsense provides a clean interface and built-in security features, but its community and documentation are smaller
The summary above is based on 40 interviews we conducted with pfSense and OPNsense users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Whenever I need something, Fortinet improves and updates the software for me."
"The stability and scalability of this solution are satisfactory. Its SD-WAN, VPN, and URL filtering features are very useful."
"It is easy to manage, and it doesn't need much knowledge from the team. It is a stable device, and there are many features that are included out of the box."
"Our project needs to link two sides through the internet. One of these was in Cairo and the other in another city. We used FortiGate as the integrating solution between the two locations, i.e. the Fortinet 30E & 100E."
"The scalability of Fortinet FortiGate is good."
"The most valuable features are the possibility of having one fabric for switching on security."
"The solution can scale well."
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"pfSense helped us during COVID-19 because we used OpenVPN to connect from home."
"The most valuable features of pfSense are security, user-friendliness, and helpful online management."
"Its features rival many of the high cost solutions out there."
"The ability to create a VPN allows me to monitor branch offices from a central location."
"It is much simpler than other solutions such as Fortinet."
"It has a good web cache. I used to use a DHCP server and DNS server. For my company, I use pfSense as a load balancing application."
"The built-in open VPN and the VPN Client Export are the solution's most valuable aspects."
"What I like about pfSense is that it works well and runs on an inexpensive appliance."
"The system in general is quite flexible."
"OPNsense is easy to use and open source."
"We can open a new VPN connection easily. It's much easier than with Fortinet in our experience."
"OPNsense is easy to scale when running on the hardware."
"The most valuable features of OPNsense are the GUI and frequent updates."
"I find the solution to be user-friendly. It has a lot of reports and easy settings."
"The most valuable features are reporting, the Sensei plugin, and firewall capabilities."
"We have found pretty much all the features of the solution to be valuable."
"Pricing for it is a bit high. It could be cheaper."
"Stability and technical support are the two major issues I have found with Fortinet."
"Fortinet needs to overhaul its documentation."
"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 need user-behavior analytics, to find threat scenarios from inside the organization, insider attacks. That would be very helpful for us. In addition, I would like next-generation features for small and medium businesses. These businesses require UTM, all in one product. Fortinet must include it."
"There is one big configuration file with no separations for the unique VDOMs. Maybe they could separate individual VDOM configuration files with the root VDOM configuration file referencing the individual VDOM config files."
"This product could be improved with Active directory integration and better handling in IPsec and GRE Tunnels."
"Difficult to add or define, and not that easy to configure and manage."
"ClamAV AntiVirus can cause some crashes. That service should be improved."
"When I checked other packages, it seems they use different tools that are installed on the PSS for functionality. They rely on third-party tools, unlike Fortinet, for example, which has its own tools. In comparison, we also use third-party tools on pfSense. For example, we had a situation where we needed a tool to identify authorized users, and when I searched for a solution, I found a third-party tool. However, using such tools may come with additional costs."
"Also, simplifying the rules for the GeoIP. Making it simpler to understand would be an improvement."
"The stability could be improved."
"I believe improving integration with various antivirus vendors could be beneficial."
"If a user doesn't have a large amount of experience in Linux systems, they will have problems using this solution. Users need to be highly skilled in troubleshooting competency. Users who do not have such skills will find the product difficult to use."
"Could be simplified for new users."
"In terms of areas of improvement, the interface seemed like it had a lot. The GUI interface that I had gotten into was rather elaborate. I don't know if they could zero in on some markets and potentially for small, medium businesses specifically, give them a stripped-down version of the GUI for pfSense."
"The only thing that I would like to see improved is the Insight or the NetFlow analysis part. It would be good to have the possibility to dig down on the Insight platform. Right now, we can easily do only a few analyses. If this page becomes more powerful, it surely will be a well-adopted platform."
"The user interface could be improved, and the DNS section should be more intuitive."
"The reporting part could be better."
"We did not like the fact that you have to configure everything with the graphic user interface. We have used other firewalls, such as FortiGate, that you can configure via code. OPNsense is not easy to integrate. When you are deploying via GitHub or another source repository, this is not possible. That's one thing we didn't like much."
"While they do have paid options that actually gives better features, for most of the clients, if they tend to take a paid option will instead opt for Fortinet."
"An area for improvement in OPNsense is the hardware, which needs to be updated more frequently. DNS blocking is another good feature I want to be added to the solution. pfSense has a peer-blocking feature that I also want to see in OPNsense."
"You will need additional training before you can actually start to use it."
"There are a few weaknesses. For example, there is a lack of some features that I have in certain commercial products."
Netgate pfSense is ranked 1st in Firewalls with 128 reviews while OPNsense is ranked 3rd in Firewalls with 36 reviews. Netgate pfSense is rated 8.6, while OPNsense is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Netgate pfSense writes "User-friendly, easy to manage the firewall, rule-wise and interface-wise". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OPNsense writes "Robust network security and management offering a user-friendly interface, open-source flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, with challenges regarding initial setup and the absence of official support". Netgate pfSense is most compared with Sophos XG, KerioControl, Sophos UTM, Cisco Secure Firewall and WatchGuard Firebox, whereas OPNsense is most compared with Sophos XG, Untangle NG Firewall, Sophos UTM, IPFire and WatchGuard Firebox. See our Netgate pfSense vs. OPNsense 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.