Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Check Point CloudGuard Network Security vs Cisco Secure Firewall vs Palo Alto Networks VM-Series comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.4
Fortinet FortiGate offers favorable ROI with cost savings, efficiency, and ease of deployment, enhancing productivity and reducing ownership costs.
Sentiment score
7.4
CloudGuard improves efficiency and reduces costs by streamlining security management, despite challenges in measuring exact financial returns.
Sentiment score
7.2
Cisco Secure Firewall offers improved security and efficiency, but cost and ROI vary based on deployment and usage.
Sentiment score
7.1
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series offers strong ROI with enhanced security, increased agility, and significant time savings for users.
Clients are now comfortable and not wasting productive hours on IT support.
The automation part is giving us a cost benefit and speed; we can react faster.
It's a very useful tool to mitigate and protect your enterprise.
The value lies in maintaining operational integrity with zero downtime or incidents, facilitating secure, ongoing business operations.
Implementing CloudGuard has resulted in an excellent return on investment over one hundred percent ROI.
The unified policy is comprehensive and helps me to create firewall policies that are shared across all our facilities and plants.
The biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Firewall is that there's no waste in any infrastructure cost and licensing costs for us.
From my point of view, the biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Firewall is the single pane of glass, which is a huge plus for us.
The biggest return on investment for me when using Cisco Secure Firewall is reliability and robust network design.
Customers can see data within a week, indicating a quick return on investment.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.6
Fortinet's support is generally responsive and helpful, though some users experience slow response times and complex issues.
Sentiment score
7.1
Check Point CloudGuard support is mostly praised for expertise and speed, but needs improvement in response consistency for complex issues.
Sentiment score
7.5
Cisco Secure Firewall support is highly rated for knowledgeable assistance, though response times and access vary based on contracts.
Sentiment score
7.6
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series support is responsive and professional, but some users note room for improvement in efficiency.
They offer very accurate solutions.
The quick resolution of issues with Fortinet FortiGate is due to the support of the company and the fact that the equipment is easy to work with.
I would rate the technical support for Fortinet FortiGate a ten out of ten.
They usually respond quite fast, and they are very knowledgeable about what they do.
We had an endless loop of emails trying to fix this, and the suggestion was to reinstall the gateway and do it from scratch, which was not an option at that point because it would leave that specific location without access.
Available twenty-four by seven.
I have to provide many logs, yet problems remain unresolved, often requiring workarounds rather than solutions.
I have been working with them on firewalls, wireless, switching, and routing, and the support is the best.
They have expertise and provide solutions for the most difficult problems.
The support quality could be improved.
Resolving issues promptly.
They are responsive and provide high-quality assistance.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
Fortinet FortiGate is praised for scalability, effective in both large and small businesses, but hardware scaling can be challenging.
Sentiment score
7.6
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security excels in scalability and integration across cloud platforms like AWS and Azure with auto-scaling.
Sentiment score
7.2
Cisco Secure Firewall offers scalability and integration, though licensing complexity and scalability challenges in growth may concern some users.
Sentiment score
7.6
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is scalable, satisfying users despite some cloud integration challenges, and suitable for diverse enterprises.
They scale up really well from smaller models like the FortiGate 40 and 50 to bigger sites with the FortiGate 100 for more throughput - up to enterprise datacenters.
The variation comes in terms of the interfaces and throughputs, but from a security perspective, you get the same benefit, irrespective of whether you have an entry-level unit or an enterprise.
We determine sizing based on multiple factors: number of users, available links, traffic types, server count, services in use, and whether services will be published.
I can deploy it everywhere I need it.
We have transitioned from 1,000 to 500 users without any issue.
We perform minor and major upgrades, and it works seamlessly.
Scalability presents a challenge.
Compared to FortiGate and Palo Alto, it lags in configuration and other aspects.
Even with the highest one, the 4600, we still face issues, particularly when transitioning between screens; it becomes very slow.
They are easy to upgrade, and with credit licensing, they scale effectively according to demand.
The solution is scalable and can easily handle an increase in the number of users.
It is easy to use with an excellent graphical user interface and extensive documentation, which contributes to its high scalability.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Fortinet FortiGate is praised for reliability, with stability enhancements through updates, despite some firmware bugs and performance challenges.
Sentiment score
7.9
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is praised for its stability, reliability, and efficiency, handling growth without major disruptions.
Sentiment score
7.2
Cisco Secure Firewall is highly reliable with minimal outages, though occasional upgrade issues are typically fixed with updates.
Sentiment score
8.3
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is praised for stability and reliability, despite occasional bugs and manual interventions during upgrades.
We're experiencing 99.999% availability consistently.
I would rate the stability of Fortinet FortiGate a ten out of ten.
Currently, we are experiencing a general outage of one of the main internet service providers of the Dominican Republic, and we have not been impacted in our operations because with SD-WAN, we have another internet service provider and we are working with the second WAN connection without any disruption.
I have not observed any downtime.
For instance, when we are working on a release and do an upgrade, we start experiencing unexpected issues.
The solution is stable.
We have often encountered split-brain scenarios during failover processes and code upgrades, which have been persistent problems for us.
We work with a cluster with high availability, so if something goes wrong, we have it functioning.
Cisco Secure Firewall offers exceptional performance and stability.
Hardware is generally very stable.
I have not experienced any major problems or downtime.
Perfection is unlikely as the dynamic nature of traffic and constant changes can result in occasional bugs despite regular updates.
 

Room For Improvement

Fortinet FortiGate needs improved stability, intuitive support, cost-effective licensing, and better compatibility with fewer bugs and enhanced reporting.
Users recommend interface improvements, better integration, simplified setup, enhanced support, and advanced features for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security.
Cisco Secure Firewall faces criticism for its complex GUI, high costs, and demands better features, integration, and performance improvements.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series needs better integration, scalability, documentation, cloud compatibility, and improved features to address user concerns and performance.
Investing in a solution that can accommodate such growth would be more cost-effective than repeatedly purchasing new hardware.
The constant daily revisions necessitate meticulous identification of the relevant documents to prevent the use of outdated information that could jeopardize our environment.
While Fortinet claims to offer a comprehensive network solution, it falls short in addressing computer application issues, particularly server security.
Scalability could be improved as well; needing to purchase a new license each time I want to add a new interface is not ideal.
Better documentation would be welcome.
The user interface could be more intuitive, and the initial setup and configuration can be complex, requiring a technical team.
My ongoing complaint for the last six years has been the lack of CLI functionality, which hinders my ability to work on the firewall, alongside concerns regarding deployment time.
Firepower Management Center is quite out of date compared to other vendors.
The integration between Cisco products themselves presents difficulties, such as SD-WAN configuration.
Integration with CSIRT across all use levels would make it easier for administrators to stay updated on the blocked entities without manual intervention.
Most customers go for partner-enabled support, which involves multiple layers, leading to delays.
When managing the firewall, it involves a Strata Cloud web browser that requires improvement to enhance deployment ease and call center efficiency.
 

Setup Cost

Fortinet FortiGate offers cost-effective enterprise-level features with competitive long-term pricing, affordable licensing, and valuable support packages.
Check Point CloudGuard offers flexible pricing, seen as both cost-effective and expensive, with potential high costs for features and support.
Cisco Secure Firewall is costly but offers robust support and reliability; licensing complexity can be mitigated by smart licensing.
Palo Alto Networks' VM-Series pricing is high but justified by advanced security features, with flexible licensing aiding budget management.
FortiGate is priced lower than Palo Alto.
Last year, I renewed the support for three years, which can sometimes be expensive but depends on the security benefits and how it helps us.
It is about 20% cheaper.
The pricing and licensing are expensive, costing between seven thousand to eight thousand dollars.
Check Point is expensive, however, with the features and capabilities, I can justify the cost.
It is the highest in the market.
It's good to have them, however, it costs us a lot.
It's considered a premium, but people pay that price for Cisco.
There are a lot of in-place contracts for us that provide the benefit of discounts.
Palo Alto is expensive in terms of pricing, particularly when comparing features to cost.
The cost involves purchasing through a vendor, which might mark up due to the supply chain.
Pricing for Palo Alto Networks is higher than other OEMs, but considering the robustness and features, it gains customer trust.
 

Valuable Features

Fortinet FortiGate is praised for its VPN, firewall, ease of use, cost-effectiveness, and versatile network management features.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security offers centralized management, auto-scaling, and integration, enhancing security with threat prevention and intuitive management.
Cisco Secure Firewall provides robust security, scalability, and central management, with intuitive tools for efficient threat protection and network monitoring.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series excels in threat prevention, scalability, and user-friendly management, integrating advanced security features and cloud services.
In terms of security, we have not experienced any security flaws or loopholes, and it has proven to be quite stable.
FortiGate has helped reduce the risk of cyberattacks that might disrupt our client's production.
These features help reduce our downtime, manage the ISPs, and deploy SLAs for all the website traffic.
One of the most valuable features is the automated threat prevention, which helps us detect and block potential cyberattacks in real-time, minimizing data breaches.
Centralized management is the feature I like best, resulting in reduced workload and more continuous policy.
Network Security provides us with unified security management across hybrid and cloud as well as on-prem.
What stands out positively about Cisco is their training and support, which has effectively prepared engineers to work with their products.
This is very important to my organization, as we work extensively with security because we are a bank, so we can keep the data safe.
Cisco Secure Firewall allows me to safeguard Layer 7 or Layer 3 and manage the security rules with the business needs of my organization.
We use these tools to prevent all known and unknown threats using Palo Alto Networks' Wildfire and other data filtering tools to gather information, analyze traffic, manage malicious traffic, and offer visibility, control, and attack prevention.
Palo Alto's robust threat intelligence supports new updates, and I can open cases directly with their Threat Intelligence team.
The DNS security significantly enhances security through visibility and detection, allowing control over crucial traffic like DNS, which is often exploited by ransomware.
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Firewalls category, the mindshare of Fortinet FortiGate is 21.2%, up from 17.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Firewall is 6.2%, up from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is 0.9%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewalls
 

Featured Reviews

Vasu Gala - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable solution with an intuitive interface and quick customer service
I have been working with Fortinet FortiGate, WatchGuard, Sophos, and SonicWall. I'm not as comfortable with SonicWall because of their UI and limitations. I prefer Fortinet above all other options. When it comes to configuration, I am confident in my ability to handle various tasks, including creating policies such as firewall rules, web policies, and application policies. Additionally, I can configure VPNs and implement load balancing, among other tasks. Overall, I feel much more comfortable working with Fortinet. Fortinet has made significant improvements by integrating AI with firewalls for threat analysis and prevention. In the past 2-3 years, they have launched FortiSASE and SIEM, and they also provide SOC services. Both Palo Alto and Fortinet FortiGate are excellent. While Fortinet FortiGate comes at higher prices, the functionality and support justify the cost. They promptly resolve firmware issues and inform all support providers about configuration changes.
Martin Raška - PeerSpot reviewer
Unification of security features strengthens network protection
The overall network security is good. It's big-picture, all in one bundle. It's valuable to have everything in one place instead of spreading across different products. Unified security management positively affects a company's security operations. They have one unified view of the security. I can connect multiple gateways to the management and have it in one place. I can have reporting and views in a single pane of glass on the consolidated platform. It's easy to use. The management is the best on the market. It's very easy to work with, read, understand, and navigate. It helps increase our customer's security posture. We can see in some cases CloudGuard improves our customers' posture overall.
Phil Shiflett - PeerSpot reviewer
Unified policies streamline network management but complex licensing requires attention
Cisco Secure Firewall has some growth opportunities in terms of visibility and control capabilities regarding managing encrypted traffic. It has the ability to analyze encrypted traffic, and there is potential for more integration with APIs and AI to enhance these capabilities. Cisco Secure Firewall needs improvement in deployment time and the capability to access the CLI during support calls. I often encounter issues when technical support uses a CLI that is not familiar to me while troubleshooting through the GUI. My ongoing complaint for the last six years has been the lack of CLI functionality, which hinders my ability to work on the firewall, alongside concerns regarding deployment time. For the next release, they should look at the features offered by competitors such as Fortinet, including the ability to perform packet capture directly from the interface. If they enhanced their troubleshooting efficiency related to packet capture for each specific rule, it would simplify the process significantly.
RonnieYazdani - PeerSpot reviewer
User-friendly CLI and efficient dashboard streamline operations with robust security features
I find Palo Alto Networks VM-Series easy to deploy, and none of my customers have had significant complaints. My customers have high certifications provided by Palo Alto Networks. The friendly dashboard and the ability to easily command and use the CLI make Palo Alto Networks VM-Series a better product. It offers robust solutions, making it valuable to my customers.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
862,452 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Educational Organization
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
5%
Educational Organization
21%
Computer Software Company
18%
University
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which is the better NGFW: Fortinet Fortigate or Cisco Firepower?
When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage a...
What is the biggest difference between Sophos XG and FortiGate?
From my experience regarding both the Sophos and FortiGate firewalls, I personally would rather use FortiGate. I know...
What are the biggest technical differences between Sophos UTM and Fortinet FortiGate?
As a solution, Sophos UTM offers a lot of functionality, it scales well, and the stability and performance are quite ...
What do you like most about Check Point CloudGuard Network Security?
The tool's most valuable feature is its management console.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Check Point CloudGuard Network Security?
Pricing in Jamaica is a major issue, with users often citing it as a reason for not using Check Point.
What needs improvement with Check Point CloudGuard Network Security?
They could improve the documentation. The interface is fine for me since I have been using it for some time.
Which is better - Fortinet FortiGate or Cisco ASA Firewall?
One of our favorite things about Fortinet Fortigate is that you can deploy on the cloud or on premises. Fortinet Fort...
How does Cisco's ASA firewall compare with the Firepower NGFW?
It is easy to integrate Cisco ASA with other Cisco products and also other NAC solutions. When you understand the Cis...
Which is better - Meraki MX or Cisco ASA Firewall?
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) software is the operating software for the Cisco ASA suite. It supports netw...
Features comparison between Palo Alto and Fortinet firewalls
In the best tradition of these questions, Feature-wise both are quite similar, but each has things it's better at, it...
How does Azure Firewall compare with Palo Alto Networks VM Series?
Both products are very stable and easily scalable. The setup of Azure Firewall is easy and very user-friendly and the...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

FortiGate 60b, FortiGate 60c, FortiGate 80c, FortiGate 50b, FortiGate 200b, FortiGate 110c, FortiGate, Fortinet Firewall
CloudGuard IaaS, Check Point vSEC, CloudGuard IaaS, Check Point Virtual Systems, Check Point CloudGuard Network Security
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Adaptive Security Appliance, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAv, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, IBM, Cisco, Dell, HP, Oracle, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Vodafone, Orange, BT Group, Telstra, Deutsche Telekom, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, CenturyLink, NTT Communications, Tata Communications, SoftBank, China Mobile, Singtel, Telus, Rogers Communications, Bell Canada, Telkom Indonesia, Telkom South Africa, Telmex, Telia Company, Telkom Kenya
Physicians Choice Laboratory Services, Helvetica Insurance
There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.
Warren Rogers Associates
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls. Updated: July 2025.
862,452 professionals have used our research since 2012.