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

Cisco Wireless WAN vs Fortinet FortiExtender comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 4, 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 Wireless WAN
Ranking in Wireless WAN
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Fortinet FortiExtender
Ranking in Wireless WAN
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Wireless WAN category, the mindshare of Cisco Wireless WAN is 3.8%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiExtender is 2.6%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Wireless WAN Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Cisco Wireless WAN3.8%
Fortinet FortiExtender2.6%
Other93.6%
Wireless WAN
 

Featured Reviews

LalanChowdhury - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhances network reliability, offers device longevity and offers open authentication
The device longevity is a factor. enhances network reliability. Specifically, the handoff feature for WAN, when a customer moves from one access point to another in a building or office, is much easier and more reliable if it's controller-based. So, in those cases, we recommend the traditional controller-based solution. Cisco is adding AI features; they've already started in SD-WAN. But in Bangladesh, people are still new to AI. Cisco is including AI capabilities in their devices, so people are gradually adopting them. If they need AI-driven devices for industrial purposes, they can use them. So, Cisco is forward-thinking with these features. Even though they're not being used extensively now, they may be used in the future for things like RFID or automation. That's why Cisco's solution is logical and adaptable.
Özden-Aydın - PeerSpot reviewer
Ensures seamless network continuity with efficient remote management and cost savings
I manage and monitor Fortinet FortiExtender devices across multiple sites by using the FortiCloud feature, which allows me to easily manage and monitor everywhere. I haven't used Fortinet FortiExtender's AI-driven network features for this product. My advice for those who want to implement Fortinet FortiExtender is that if you use this device as a console server for out-of-band management, it has only one USB port; if you need more than one port, you can use an external USB hub for multiple console cables. I am maintaining Fortinet FortiExtender for my customers for one year, and I find that to be sufficient. I rate Fortinet FortiExtender a 10 out of 10.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Reliability and visibility in the product are most valuable. We are able to see client performance, signal strength for clients, and things like that."
"The most valuable features are user and handling capacity, indoor and outdoor access points and antennas, and the inbuilt intrusion prevention system."
"Cisco Wireless WAN allowed for time savings."
"The purchased devices last for 10 to 15 years without any issues. Users only need to renew time-based licenses if applicable."
"Cisco Wireless WAN is stable and scalable, and the support received is good."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The implementations are easy."
"Cisco Wireless access points are highly stable with a wide coverage area."
"The integration is easy and it works as a normal internet connection."
"The most valuable feature will be that it works."
"You don't need to have two different vendors to interoperate and get into comparability issues or inter-operability issues."
"We appreciate that this solution can be used as an active secondary link as well as a backup."
"Management can be carried out from a central point."
"The product is easy to use and easy to integrate."
"The initial setup was was just beautiful. It was straightforward."
"The overall stability deserves a perfect rating."
 

Cons

"We cannot use wireless for the servers due to potential performance issues. They must be connected via fiber."
"There needs to be an adjustment in subscription licenses and their pricing."
"Improvements can be made in the wireless fabric."
"It needs to increase its strength in capacity."
"The technical scalability is easy, but the license scalability is quite tricky."
"We did have issues with the product that made us concerned about the overall stability."
"A lot of the time, for users, it comes down to pricing. Many would like to see it be a bit less costly."
"Include more managing features within the product, rather than having to purchase them as extras."
"The engineering of the solution has some negative points, especially in terms of troubleshooting. It's difficult to troubleshoot when we have a problem. It's not like other products like Cisco or Palo Alto which make troubleshooting much easier."
"There is a huge downside because we need to remove and insert the SIM to get it working."
"Though Fortinet FortiExtender has some security features, the product could still be improved by adding features similar to those in FortiGuard, such as antivirus, intrusion, prevention, and detection, as well as web filtering features. The product is also not as user-friendly, so that's another area for improvement. In the FortiGate UTM solution of Fortinet, there's software-defined or SD-WAN, and in the next release of Fortinet FortiExtender, I'd like to see SD-WAN embedded in the product. Most of the communication in Fortinet FortiExtender is related to WAN and Edge, so having an SD-WAN function in the product would be useful for integrating and controlling WAN communication."
"What most of my clients are telling me is the price is a problem."
"The Fortinet FortiExtender should be more suitable for outdoor use. Currently, the vehicle model can be used outdoors, but there are no dedicated outdoor devices."
"I would like to see them make it smaller in the next release so that it has a smaller footprint for mobile clients."
"They could improve the remote console server feature and make it more user-friendly for more users."
"The solution would be a lot better if it was a little bit more intuitive. Additionally, the help menu would be a lot better if it was easier to identify the items that I was looking for. I find the graphical interface a little bit difficult to navigate. And I find the font that is used on the HTML interface not conducive to being able to be read in low light situations."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is expensive."
"Cisco products generally have high list prices, but substantial discounts are available."
"The tool is expensive."
"Cisco Wireless WAN is fairly expensive."
"The pricing is good."
"This is a very expensive solution but there are no additional costs."
"The cost of Cisco Wireless WAN is expensive. There is an annual subscription to use the solution."
"The solution is not expensive."
"I'm not sure what the cost is. However, I anticipate that the purchase price will range between $2,500 and $5,000."
"The solution is not that expensive."
"I've only used the open-source version of Fortinet FortiExtender, but I know that it has some features that require you to pay for a license."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless WAN solutions are best for your needs.
866,088 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
18%
Media Company
12%
Government
8%
Construction Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business26
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise35
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Wireless WAN?
Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Wireless WAN?
Initially, Cisco comes up with high prices, but when competition starts with Huawei or HP Aruba, they provide good prices. Initially, they try to come up with large prices and huge numbers.
What needs improvement with Cisco Wireless WAN?
Cisco Wireless WAN has room for improvement in WiFi coverage. Sometimes, their coverage is normally good, but at the same area where the access points are deployed, people face continuous disconnec...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortinet FortiExtender?
The price for Fortinet FortiExtender deserves the highest rating.
What needs improvement with Fortinet FortiExtender?
The Fortinet FortiExtender should be more suitable for outdoor use. Currently, the vehicle model can be used outdoors, but there are no dedicated outdoor devices. When a location has poor LTE conne...
What is your primary use case for Fortinet FortiExtender?
I am still using Fortinet FortiExtender. The solution utilizes LTE data to establish a connection, and if the main line goes down, it switches automatically to the LTE connection. Advanced Antenna ...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aegean Motorway, Baylor Scott & White Health, Beachbody, Bellevue, Brunel University London, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Chartwell School, Children's Hospital Colorado, Cisco Live Milan, City of Biel, City of Mississauga, Dundee Precious Metals, Electricity Authority of Cyprus, Erickson Living, Goldcorp, Great Ormond Street Hospital, Grupo Industrial Saltillo (GIS)
Black Gold Regional Schools, Amadeus Hospitality, Jefferson County, Chunghwa Telecom, City of Boroondara, Dimension Data
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Wireless WAN vs. Fortinet FortiExtender and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
866,088 professionals have used our research since 2012.