We performed a comparison between Pulse Connect Secure and Fortinet FortiClient based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Pulse Connect Secure comes out ahead of Fortinet. Our reviewers found that Fortinet FortiClient lacks automation in its initial setup and some users experienced difficulty when trying to reach technical support.
"The solution has good performance."
"It's an ideal gateway solution for small and medium businesses, i.e., around 300 devices can be easily handled."
"It is a fantastic product. Its overall security is valuable. We are very impressed with the web filtering and the application firewall it provides."
"The service is centralized."
"The most valuable feature is the single pane of glass, single point of management."
"The connection speed is fast. I can connect quickly at any time, and there are never any interruptions to the FortiClient connection. I could easily code into the client's server with that connection, with no lag."
"The integration of the vulnerability scan, mobile detection, and VPN client."
"For our clients with remote sites and deployed firewalls, the filtering and authentication features are very helpful."
"There is a lot of documentation available online."
"Fortinet FortiClient's scalability is very good because it has no limitations."
"The stability of the product is its most valuable feature."
"Pulse Connect Secure is a stable solution."
"VPN tunneling is a very valuable feature of Pulse Connect Secure. I also like that it is straightforward to use, and you can see traffic logs on it."
"The new UI that they are providing right now is very good."
"The most valuable feature is being able to securely connect and use virtual desktops."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"The tool's most valuable feature is remote access."
"The most valuable features of Pulse Connect Secure are multi-factor authentications, and VPNs and SSL VPNs we are using."
"There must be a more easy-to-use GUI."
"While we like patch management, it would be nice if it could handle patch management for other solutions, like Microsoft."
"FortiClient is not communicating with the new version of the firewall."
"The user interface could be more inviting."
"One area that could be improved is cost, but you've got to pay for what you get."
"We'd like to see a deployment wizard to help implementation become streamlined."
"FortiClient's encryption key could be stronger so that it's not broken too easily."
"We'd like to be able to properly encrypt the data more effectively."
"For buying or deploying it with additional features, apart from VPN client, web security, or antivirus, I would like to see the USB key blocking function included in this solution for endpoint security. For endpoint security, you need antivirus and all of the features included in antivirus software these days, web security, and USB key locking feature. If it is implemented in a way that in one package, you have all the primary features needed for security these days, it would be nice. All of those features will probably be additionally charged as it is a web security feature on FortiClient."
"User experience and after-sales support could be better. For example, over the last couple of years, when this COVID scenario was going on, there were multiple attacks on these types of solutions. SQL has been attacked numerous times, and there were a lot of vulnerabilities, and our customers had to update and upgrade the devices every two weeks or every month. This was a headache. It could also be more scalable."
"The product could use additional dashboards."
"The user experience has room for improvement."
"The stability could be better. There are sometimes bugs in the system."
"This solution normally works but at times, we have had trouble with connectivity."
"At the moment, Pulse Connect Secure is a pretty good solution, and I don't see any issues with it. Currently, I'm not aware of a new or additional feature that's needed in Pulse Connect Secure, but it would be good if the team could look at how the speed of connection could be increased. Though it's quite seamless and I didn't face any problem with the speed, it would be better to improve the speed and keep going forward, especially as the industry's changing and people would love connections to be a lot faster."
"Zero test FDP (Fraud Protection and Prevention) should be improved."
"I would like the solution to be more secure and compatible. It also needs to improve integration with other systems."
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 85 reviews while Ivanti Connect Secure is ranked 7th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 25 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Ivanti Connect Secure is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ivanti Connect Secure writes "Beneficial multi-factor authentications, useful SSL VPNs, and simple initial setup". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway and CrowdStrike Falcon, whereas Ivanti Connect Secure is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Ivanti Tunnel, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Citrix Gateway and Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Ivanti Connect Secure report.
See our list of best Enterprise Infrastructure VPN vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.
