We performed a comparison between Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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."The dashboard I have found the most valuable in Fortinet FortiGate."
"Unified Threat Management (UTM) features."
"What's most important is the ease of use."
"The most valuable features are the possibility of having one fabric for switching on security."
"The solution is very easy to understand. It's not overly complex."
"Security, SD-WAN, and Streetscape are valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the web filter."
"The VPN is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are the security cloud ACP and KPP features."
"The virtualization feature is the most valuable feature. Sometimes customers are requesting a private connection using mobile data when they are connecting to remote sites."
"I've found the security features, such as IDS and the VPN most valuable."
"From a protection perspective, it provides a network perimeter security function for our company."
"The most valuable features of the Juniper SRX Series Firewall are the user-friendly UI, and accessing the solution is simple."
"The user interface is good."
"Juniper supports their products very well."
"Troubleshooting with the solution is quite easy. If you compare the process to, for example, Fortigate, Juniper is much easier."
"Using Palo Alto Networks Panorama, we were able to deploy a single point of management and visualization of the firewall infrastructure in cloud, on-premise and integrated with Azure to automate scale up. Its security features, i.e. anti-malware, threat prevention, URL Filtering, VPN, and antivirus are the most valuable. The ID-User integrated with AD and 2FA features are also very useful to provide secure access to servers and some users in the company. "
"The feature that I have found the most useful is that it meets all our requirements technically."
"The most valuable features are the User ID, URL filtering, and application filtering."
"The product provides more visibility into our traffic."
"The VM series has an advantage over the physical version because we are able to change the sources that the machine has, such as the amount of available RAM."
"Palo Alto Networks VM-Series has everything centralized. You have the VPN solution, firewall, routing, UDR, flexibility, updates, and full visibility of your traffic."
"We can monitor the traffic manually and detect threats. Additionally, we can block different IP addresses and URLs."
"The most valuable feature is the Posture Assessment."
"Reporting is limited to providing an external appliance for improving the reporting capabilities of the FortiAnalyzer. It does not offer a central management and is also sold separably as an appliance."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding enhancements to FortiMail, FortiSOAR, and FortiDeceptor."
"Fortinet Fortigate could benefit by simplifying some of their processes."
"The product does need better support in the cloud environment. It's not exactly cloud-native right now."
"The biggest "gotcha" is that if the client purchases what they call the UTM shared bundle, which has unified threat management on both, it's not as easy to manage if you have more than one firewall."
"The inability to scale the FortiAnalyzer to match our growth necessitates the purchase of new hardware."
"The debugging and troubleshooting has room for improvement."
"Lacks training for new features."
"Both the web management and the graphical user interface are inadequate and should be improved."
"The CPU switch could be improved for a better overall performance of traffic flow."
"We tried configuring the IDS for more than four months, but it did not work properly."
"In comparison to other enterprise-level firewalls, such as Cisco FTD, Cisco has improved significantly. In the past, I believed that Juniper SRX was superior, but after seeing the advancements in the FTD platform, Cisco has better functionality. I have not recently explored Juniper SRX's next-generation firewall capabilities as we only use basic firewall filtering in our enterprise network."
"It could have features that other products support like blade options and stand-alone endpoint security."
"It's a good stable firewall, but it's nowhere near what it needs to be for a next-generation type firewall."
"The Juniper product has to improve in terms of innovation."
"The reporting is lacking."
"The web interface is very slow, and it needs to be faster."
"We don't know how it will scale once we start putting more load on it."
"The user-friendliness of the UI could be improved."
"Palo Alto is that it is really bad when it comes to technical support."
"The DLP functionality or data classification can be improved in the solution's basic firewalling."
"From time to time, they have released some content updates that have some issues, maybe twice a year."
"They made only a halfhearted attempt to put in DLP (Data Loss Prevention)."
"It would be good if the common features work consistently in physical and virtual environments. There was an integration issue in the virtual deployment where it didn't report the interface counters, and we had to upgrade to the latest version, whereas the same thing has been working in the physical deployment for ages now. It seems that it was because of Azure. We were using VMware before, and we didn't have any such issues. We do see such small issues where we expect things to work, but they don't because of some incompatibilities. There also seems to be a limitation on how to do high availability in a virtualized environment. All features should be consistently available in physical and virtual environments. It is not always easy to integrate Palo Alto in the network management system. We would like to be able to compare two network management systems. They can maybe allow monitoring an interface through the GUI to create a reference or do a baseline check about whether your network monitoring system is actually giving you the correct traffic figures. You need traffic figures to be able to recognize the trends and plan the capacity."
Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 19th in Firewalls with 86 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 52 reviews. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and OPNsense, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Huawei NGFW. See our Juniper SRX Series Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors and 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.