No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 12, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
98
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (5th), Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (2nd), WAN Edge (2nd)
Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Q&A Highlights

OT
Assistant Vice President - IT at Au small finance bank
May 08, 2020
 

Featured Reviews

ND
Network Manager at HPCL
Faced complex visibility and policy challenges but have improved basic traffic routing control
I have found some other solutions more insightful and user-friendly as compared to Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN, but the basic SD-WAN functionality is good enough. I am using it only because it was done as a pilot project, specifically for my 60 to 70 sites. For the majority of the sites, I am using Fortinet's Secure SD-WAN solution and I found that more viable and more in alignment with my requirements. For example, there is not any Internet Service Database available in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN intrinsically. If I want to write a policy based on applications, I am not able to write it, at least in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Viptela deployment that we have done, and that is fairly easy to do in Fortinet. The second issue is the logging capability. I think the visibility that Fortinet Secure SD-WAN has is not even comparable. Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN does not provide that sort of insight or control as far as traffic steering is concerned. With respect to the SLAs, I barely know which sort of SLAs are violated in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN, so I do not have clear visibility on where the traffic is moving from at my spoke or hub locations. I believe Fortinet gives me a very clear picture of where the traffic is going. Overall visibility, whether it is data traffic or logs, is much better in Fortinet compared to Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. The complexity of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Viptela is noticeable and quite complicated to configure. If something breaks, you have to involve TAC and others to fix it. On the contrary, you can work with underlays. Even if your IPsec overlay tunnel is down, it does not impact your production. Thus, we find Fortinet's solution significantly better than Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN solution. I have used Application-aware Routing in Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN. However, I found it to be very complicated, especially regarding policy writing. For my breakout of VC traffic, we had to write a bunch of IP addresses for Zoom, Webex, and others. Presently, it can only identify Webex as an application, and I highly doubt whether there is any application identification for Zoom and other platforms, as we were not able to find it during our implementation. It is done through static whitelisting of the IPs, which is not a scalable solution since IPs can change at any time. Overall, the application-aware routing policies are not as flexible and scalable as the Internet Service Database feature of Fortinet provides. The struggles encompass policy writing, logging capabilities, traffic visibility, and complex configuration. There is also the issue of load balancing. We have faced considerable challenges with traffic load balancing between the links. Although the SLA targets are configurable, understanding how traffic flows is challenging, making troubleshooting exceedingly difficult. Overall, I find it a quite complicated solution with not that much operational usability.
Rohit Ghorpade - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Network Engineer at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees
A scalable solution for MCN controller but lacks technical supports, upgrades
There are a few things that can be improved, are domain-based routing and the slowness of virtual parts, and it may be due to the wrong configuration, which we have been unable to find out. Previously, we faced some issues with the slowness part. Apart from that, feature like end gateway level antivirus. We are currently using a NetFlow proxy to establish a virtual position for the NetFlow. Our current environment has many use cases, but we are not using them on the Citrix SD-WAN. When I navigate the NCL part, it involves configuration. I want to highlight this disadvantage. Sometimes, when we push the configuration, it tries to push it to all branch locations. This process takes a lot of time, nearly 30 minutes, to push a single change from the NCL. Overall, I don't think Citrix meets our use cases what we have. This is based on my feedback after using it for the past year and working on this Citrix SD-WAN. However, from my experience, it is the worst solution I have seen. There's no domain-based routing, which is horrible. That's why we are moving to other products. We have checked our use case requirements with Fortinet, Palo Alto, and they meet them. I will consider the PoC or another OEM. There are many things in the area you need to be prompt, like the automation part. If any link or device goes down, alerting notification, etc. We need to perform and highlight so many things to your management. This should be improved.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Cisco SD-WAN is a great solution and definitely worth the investment."
"Initial setup is easy."
"Cisco SD-WAN's most valuable feature is the ease of transition."
"From a network perspective, it's a very good solution, but the security features could be better."
"It is very simple and easy to manage, compared to other methods."
"We would recommend this solution to customers looking to implement it on a global scale. We recommend the solution, not only because of the functionality or the technical support, but also because of the delivery of the solution, and the docking and upgrading capabilities."
"I would recommend Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN as it is a good product."
"Cisco is always good with technical support, it's easy and the contact is fast when you really need it."
"The functionality of Citrix SD-WAN is awesome and I fell in love with it on this deployment because it's so easy to use."
"In summary, this is a very good product and one that I recommend."
"We tried to use it, and it worked well."
"The hands-on customer support and load balancing that come with this solution are above all others on the market."
"The VPN and the load balancing are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is security, as it gives me the port bindings that cannot be accomplished using other solutions."
"The most valuable feature of Citrix SD-WAN is customization. You are able to customize the solution to your needs."
"The best feature is the backup capability, where all of the users' computers are tied into a central data repository."
 

Cons

"The process of onboarding the vSmart, vBond, and vManage should be improved to make it easier to manage in general."
"We had some issues with Cisco SD-WAN but somehow we troubleshot it and things are going well. The issues have not been a large problem."
"The solution should not be so bound to ISPs."
"All of the configurations are based on templates, and we need to spend a lot of time doing the templates."
"An area for improvement lies in enhancing the integration with the security functions of the SD-WAN."
"The initial setup is really complex."
"As a seller, I still find Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN to be a little complicated."
"The cost is too high for certain countries, for example, those in Africa. The solution needs to be more cost-effective."
"Customer Service: Not great - the first line support for this product is pretty much nil."
"I would like to see more customization to adjust for the WAN lock-out due to our unexpected power outages."
"The firewall reporting could be easier to use and filter."
"I would like to see more customization to adjust for the WAN lock-out due to our unexpected power outages."
"The price is the only thing that could be improved. Citrix is not a cheap solution."
"The reports need to be improved. We need to have them customized but they don't have that right now."
"The communication around the life cycle would have been really helpful. The main issue we have had is related to the life cycle because some of the things that we are using were discontinued. They were discontinued within a year after we had purchased it, which is a bit painful. If we had known that, we would've made some other decisions."
"The initial setup is not that easy."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is quite expensive so it is important to enhance its cost efficiency."
"The product's license is expensive."
"It is much cheaper than other solutions. Most of our clients are the top 500 companies, and they all have a corporate contract."
"There is no license required for this solution."
"Cisco SD-WAN is more expensive than its competitors."
"Cisco is more expensive than FortiGate."
"SD-WAN as a service is probably something in the neighborhood of $100 to $200 a month per location."
"Cisco's pricing is not entirely satisfactory when you compare the SD-WAN solutions in Asian markets — like the South Asian market in Sri Lanka — because there are several competing brands including Fortinet and Citrix, who provide much the same product for a generally lower price. And when it comes to firewall vendors like Palo Alto and SonicWall, they're also selling here. It's the same with VMware, too; they have much the same features."
"I'm not quite sure of the price ranges. Roughly, the hidden devices can scale up to $20K for one appliance. However, the branch CPs are USD $1,000 to $2,500."
"It is a bit expensive. A cheaper product would be good, but everybody likes things to be cheaper. We bought the devices up front, and then we pay for the annual support."
"I believe that Citrix SD-WAN is a good investment, but I do not have the information to be more specific."
"Citrix SD-WAN is quite an affordable product."
"It depends on the scale. In our case, it would have been better if we had known about the life cycling steps, but otherwise, it is worth the money."
"The license was a one-time purchase. It's expensive."
"It's a little bit on the high side compared to the other products."
"As NetScaler is now, I find it quite pricey."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions solutions are best for your needs.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business44
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise44
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco SD-WAN?
The pricing of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN is rated between eight and nine out of ten, where ten is the most expensive.
What needs improvement with Cisco SD-WAN?
I have found some other solutions more insightful and user-friendly as compared to Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN, but the basic SD-WAN functionality is good enough. I am using it only because it was done a...
What is your primary use case for Cisco SD-WAN?
I have used Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN as a customer. I am a customer of Cisco, and I have been a customer rather than a partner of Cisco.
What needs improvement with Citrix SD-WAN?
The solution's licensing model could be improved. Citrix SD-WAN is a good product from a technical point of view. However, when you compare its licensing with the prices of competitors, you will se...
What advice do you have for others considering Citrix SD-WAN?
If a customer already has Citrix NetScaler and is not looking to change anything in their existing environment, we proceed with Citrix SD-WAN. However, if a customer is looking for a change because...
 

Also Known As

Cisco SD-WAN
Citrix CloudBridge, WOC, NetScaler SD-WAN
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Doyle Research, Ashton Metzler & Associates
AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Cornerstone Home Lending Inc., Dallara, ecVision, Essar, Eurofred, Groupe Promutuel, HMSHost Corporation, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines Ltd, Royal Caribbean International
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet, Cisco, Palo Alto Networks and others in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,244 professionals have used our research since 2012.