We performed a comparison between Huawei NGFW and Meraki MX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's a firewall that secures our internal network. I have been using it since 2013, and I find that most of the features are advanced, and very user friendly."
"I like how we can achieve total integration."
"FortiGate improved our security. It's one of the best hardware firewalls."
"We can detect any attack of viruses or malware at the first point of contact."
"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."
"Their interface is very easy to use, it is without bugs."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are remote access, web filtering, and IPS."
"The pipe filter application is an outstanding feature."
"The solution's initial setup process is easy."
"I like that the initial setup is straighforward. It's also a scalable solution."
"It enables us to configure different policies and restrictions for specific users within the same subnet."
"The solution's performance is good with IPSec."
"The solution's implementation is pretty easy."
"Huawei was able to assist us in the installation of their product. The installation was very fast."
"The mapping features and traffic logging are good."
"We have found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"Dual WAN connections are greatly simplified and point-to-point VPNs automatically connect regardless of what WAN connection is active."
"I use Meraki in my POCs and with my customers as well."
"Ease of management is the best thing about the solution."
"Traffic Shaping: The device lets you decide how you want to use your internet services. Due to the fact that Meraki can accept dual WAN, you can decide the way you balance the data traffic."
"The simplicity of configuration is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"Real Auto VPN with load balancer without needing a public IP. It is simple and functional."
"It is very easy to configure."
"WAN optimization is the best feature of the solution."
"The non-error conserve mode has room for improvement."
"From a reporting perspective, there's room for improvement. They're providing FortiAnalyzer through which one can get some enhancements, but the visibility and reporting still need slight improvement."
"Its reporting capabilities can be improved. It should have some out-of-the-box reporting capabilities and some degree of customization. The basic reporting that it currently has is not sufficient to create more usable reports. It needs some sort of out-of-the-box reporting. They try to make customers purchase FortiAnalyzer for this kind of reporting, which is an additional cost. Other firewall vendors, such as SonicWall and Sophos, provide this sort of reporting without any additional cost."
"One issue that I have had is that sometimes I need to monitor the traffic, so I need to filter it according to the user and which user is using it the most. I experience a bottleneck most of the time, particularly at the peak time when the number of contracts and users are at maximum."
"I think there could be more QoS features"
"The solution's framework needs to be frequently updated in order to have a stable solution."
"The cloud features and integration could be improved."
"I think the only issue that needs improvement is the interface."
"The solution could be cheaper."
"The solution could be more secure and have better integration."
"The WAF capability in the Huawei Firewall is missing."
"The solution is scalable but it is difficult because you need to purchase new systems, it is not just one click."
"The IPS feature must be improved."
"The solution does not have sandboxing features."
"Wi-Fi scanning and Wi-Fi analysis would be useful features to include in the future."
"The solution doesn't seem to be very mature. Our networking team says they are experiencing a lot of issues in the firewalls and some routers."
"More detail needed for configuration of the VPN."
"I need more UTM protection security features."
"It is very expensive."
"As far as what needs to be improved — nothing really comes to mind. It does what we need it to do."
"MX can only be managed via a web interface, but I'm accustomed to using a CLI or a graphical interface. I would also like to see more reporting features. It doesn't provide enough information for me to know precisely about some clients."
"Meraki MX can come across as an expensive solution."
"The client-side VPN is weak. The product could be improved with deployment templates."
"Could possibly use deeper configurations."
Huawei NGFW is ranked 30th in Firewalls with 18 reviews while Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 57 reviews. Huawei NGFW is rated 7.2, while Meraki MX is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Huawei NGFW writes "A scalable and easy-to-setup product that can be used to configure different policies for specific users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". Huawei NGFW is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and Sophos XG, whereas Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Netgate pfSense. See our Huawei NGFW vs. Meraki MX 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.
