Menlo Secure vs Netgate pfSense comparison

Menlo Security and Netgate are both solutions in the Firewalls category. Menlo Security is ranked #52, while Netgate is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.8. Menlo Security holds a 0.1% mindshare in Firewalls, compared to Netgate’s 13.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Menlo Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of Netgate users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 2024

Netgate pfSense and Menlo Secure offer robust cybersecurity solutions with distinct advantages. Netgate pfSense is well-regarded for its user satisfaction in pricing and deployment, while Menlo Secure stands out with its advanced threat protection and overall feature set.

Features: Netgate pfSense is praised for its customizable firewall functionalities, extensive plugin support, and flexible nature. Menlo Secure is valued for its advanced threat isolation capabilities, seamless integration with existing IT infrastructure, and innovative security features.

Room for Improvement: Netgate pfSense users seek better documentation, enhanced technical support, and improved knowledge resources. Menlo Secure users desire improved scalability options, lower false positive rates in threat detection, and fine-tuning in its operational efficiency.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Netgate pfSense users report a straightforward deployment process but have mixed experiences with customer service responsiveness. Menlo Secure is noted for smooth deployment and excellent customer service support.

Pricing and ROI: Netgate pfSense is favored for its cost-effectiveness and satisfactory return on investment. Menlo Secure's higher setup costs are balanced by its superior security features, promising better long-term ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Menlo Secure vs. Netgate pfSense Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure vs. Netgate pfSense

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 850,236 peers since 2012

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

Fortinet FortiGate

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Firewalls category, the mindshare of Fortinet FortiGate is 21.4%, up from 17.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Menlo Secure is 0.1%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netgate pfSense is 13.3%, down from 22.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Firewalls

Featured Reviews

EhabAli

Sr. Cybersecurity Solutions Architect at BMB

Efficient, user-friendly, and affordable

In the past, NSS Labs was utilized to test files and verify the numbers and datasheets. It would be beneficial to have an organization or testing lab that can verify the numbers in our datasheets since changes are frequently made, which can be inconvenient for review. For instance, when comparing different competitors such as Forcepoint, Palo Alto, and Check Point, the throughput or numbers in the datasheet may be lower than the actual numbers. Conversely, Fortinet typically reports very high numbers, but they cannot be replicated in the real world. Therefore, it would be advantageous for them to partner with a neutral testing organization such as NSS Labs to validate these numbers, thus providing more credibility and comfort to everyone regarding the accuracy of the datasheets. For the migration, everyone has a firewall in use and I am selling Fortinet. Typically, I am replacing another firewall. Previously, there was a tool available to convert configurations from one firewall, such as Palo Alto, to Fortinet, but this tool is no longer free. If it could be made free again, it would be very beneficial. This tool shows a lot of promise and is very good. Making it free would help many companies deliver their products in a more efficient and integrated way. It would also be more valuable to include the tool with the firewall package or license instead of having to pay extra for it. Paying extra puts more pressure on small companies to deliver the firewall and complete the configuration, especially if they have hundreds or thousands of policies. It's very painful to move through these policies line by line. The stability has room for improvement. When it comes to Secure SD-WAN, everything is fine. They are going the right way. SD-WAN is very promising. They can provide the SD-WAN solution separately, but they will not take this approach because even the smallest firewall can support the features, so there is no need to have a separate service or appliance. They are following the right steps, and there is nothing to be improved. Feature-wise, I'm really satisfied with the new release, and the features they have added. For now, it's fine.

Read full review

Olivier DALOY

Group Information Systems Security Director - CISO at Faurecia

Secures users wherever they are and enable us to inspect SSL traffic, but we encountered too many issues

The solution should have no impact but it does have a bit of impact on end-users. For example, we encountered some issues in the downloads that took longer than they did without using Menlo. That is clearly not transparent for users. We expected not to have any latency when downloading anything from the internet with Menlo compared to without Menlo. We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution. In other words, we hope to get the same level of protection, while reducing the number of visible bugs, issues, latencies, impacts on performance, et cetera, that we have today with Menlo. We already solved most of them, but we still have too many such instances of issues with Menlo, even though it is protecting us for sure. The weak point of the solution is that it has consumed far too much of my team's time, taking them away from operations and projects and design. It took far too much time to implement it and get rid of all of the live issues that we encountered when our users started using the solution. The good point is that I'm sure it is protecting us and it's probably protecting us more than any other solution, which is something I appreciate a lot as a CISO. But on the other hand, the number of issues reported by the users, and the amount of time that has been necessary for either my team or the infrastructure team to spend diagnosing, troubleshooting, and fixing the issues that we had with the solution was too much. And that doesn't include the need to still use our previous solution, Blue Coat, that we have kept active so that whatever is not compatible or doesn't work with Menlo, can be handled by that other solution. It is far too demanding in terms of effort and workload and even cost, at the end of the day. That is why we decided to transition to another solution. If we had known in the beginning that we would not be able to get rid of Blue Coat, we probably would not have chosen Menlo because we were planning to replace Blue Coat with something that was at least able to do the same and more. We discovered that it was able to do more but it was not able to replace it, which is an issue. It is not only a matter of cost but is also a matter of not being able to reduce the number of partners that you have to deal with. In addition, they could enhance the ability to troubleshoot. Whenever a connection going through Menlo fails for any reason, being able to troubleshoot what the configuration of Menlo should be to allow it through would help, as would knowing what level of additional risk we would be taking with that configuration.

Read full review

Vincent Hamm

CIO and President at Aim High! Inc.

I appreciate the depth of what the solution can do and the simplicity of the initial setup

We do a lot of managed services and are currently trying to get people off of L2TP VPN. Apparently, we can download a mobile config file from a configured NetGate device, and we're primarily Apple. We've experimented with it on a device that's not a production device, and we can't seem to get the phase one IPSec set correctly so that the Apple config will accept it. We've tried looking at the documentation but haven't found anything. While it's not the highest priority, it is rather frustrating. We'd like to do this, and the feature is right there, but we can't get it configured. We certainly don't want to try it on a production machine because it will break the current VPN. I would like to download the Apple mobile config so that I can tell it to configure my VPN connection to do that. We have some cross-platform things. So there's also a Windows VPN. You can download a script or a PowerShell, put it on a Windows machine, and it can connect to the VPN. It would be nice if I could say I want Mac only, Windows only, or both. I wish it could configure the IPSec phase one and phase two, or at least give me solid instructions on how to configure that. It doesn't supply out-of-the-box visibility to drive decisions. You get 75 log lines, so if you're trying to troubleshoot something, you have to look at one log and then another. It integrates with SysLog systems, but our customers are not at the level where they want to pay for some third-party SysLog system. Usually, we can get things taken care of fairly quickly. I would like to have the ability to control all my devices from one place. With Ubiquiti, you can get a controller that allows you to control all of your Wi-Fi devices, switches, and routers. From one area, you can switch to that customer and see what's happening in their environment. That's not part of pfSense. I understand why it's not because pfSense is open source and community supported. That's something that someone in the community needs to pick up and run with. It's not something the pfSense can easily implement. If they could, that'd be great.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We are very happy with the general bandwidth agility we have seen from one website to another website."

"It can expand easily."

"The product has been very stable, based on my ten to eleven years of experience."

"FortiGate is more feature-rich and has a broader range of hardware. T"

"Run Script is the best tool to use in Fortinet FortiGate with multiple environments."

"Our security improved from being able to put in rules and close off unwanted traffic."

"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate is URL filtering."

"The CLI is robust and powerful, enabling rapid, consistent changes via SSH."

More Fortinet FortiGate pros

"For us, the primary goal is protection on the web, and that's extremely important. We're not using any of the other services at this time. The web part is key to the success of the organization. It gives us the ability to protect. It can isolate. It opens the session in an isolated format so that the code isn't running locally. It is running over in the Menlo environment, not in ours. It is not running on the local computer, whereas if you were to go to a normal website, it would run Java or something else on the local machine and potentially execute the malicious code locally. So, it does give us that level of protection."

"Accessing the internet with a proxy from anywhere is the most valuable feature. It ensures that users are only able to browse legitimate websites. If they happen to go to a legitimate website with a malicious payload, the isolation feature will take care of that."

"The fact that it is a cloud proxy solution is another feature we like. For example, if you acquire a new company, you can use it to protect that new company without the need to install anything physically on their networks."

"It has reduced security events to follow up on. While it is not 100%, there has been probably a 90% or more reduction. We were getting hit left, right, and center constantly from people browsing the Internet and hitting bad websites. It was not just bad websites that were stood up to be malicious, but good sites that were compromised."

"I had some outages in the network and we provide services for our company. We sell mobile credits. The terminal gets access to our own server inside the network and if one internet fails, then the other one is still up and we have a back-up link on the devices."

"I am happy with the EPLS, the radius, and I am happy with the captive portal."

"The stability is good. I haven't had any issues with the firewall crashing spontaneously."

"The initial setup is not complex."

"pfSense helped us during COVID-19 because we used OpenVPN to connect from home."

"I mostly like all of it. Whatever we use is valuable."

"We like the fact that the product is open-source. It's free to use. There are no costs associated with it."

"OpenVPN, IPsec, DHCP, and DNS are the most valuable features."

More Netgate pfSense pros

Cons

"We had a minor problem where there was a major system upgrade on the hardware platfrom and the Mac client was not available as soon as it might have been. The PC client was available immediately, but we had to wait a month or so, before there was a mac client. I was slightly irritated that it was not ready on time, but it was eventually resolved."

"The firmware needs improvement because there are bugs when a new release comes through. Sometimes, the configuration changes, and it's a bit harder to see where the fail is. The first time that you have the firmware, it tends to have some issues, and it's better to wait a bit to update the equipment."

"Currently, without the additional reporting module, we only have access to basic reporting."

"With the addition of some features, it is possible that FortiGate can be used in all verticals."

"When we cluster the two Fortinet FortiGate boxes together we have some issues."

"Fortinet FortiGate could improve the user interface. There should be more functionality and options through the GUI."

"FortiGate can improve its token system, as it requires a purchase before use."

"I'm not sure if it's something that they already have or are developing something, however, we need some dedicated features for container security."

More Fortinet FortiGate cons

"In the best of all worlds, we wouldn't have to make any exceptions. However, that is a big ask because a lot of that depends on how websites are constructed. For example, there are some very complex, application-oriented sites that we end up making exceptions for. It is really not that big an issue for us to make the exceptions. We feel like we are doing that without a huge impact on our security posture, but we do have to make some exceptions for complex sites, e.g., mostly SaaS-type sites and applications."

"We are now transitioning to another solution. The main reason for that is that managing all of the exceptions and troubleshooting all of the issues our users have had connecting to the internet has become too significant in terms of workload, compared to what we hope we will have with another solution."

"Currently, I don't have a good way to see which of my rules are being used in the access control lists. I have numerous entries, but are they all still needed? A report that would show me my list of who is allowed and whether we're actually using it would be useful because I can then go clean up my list. It would be easier to manage. We would eliminate the vulnerability of unused services."

"The user monitoring could still be improved."

"Multi-appliance monitoring and management, like a single pane of glass, would be very nice to have. A centralized management console would help us."

"I'd like to find something in pfSense that is more specific to URL filtering. We have customers who would like to filter their web traffic. They would like to be able to say to their employees, "You can surf the web, but you cannot get access to Facebook or other social media," or "You can surf the web, but you're not allowed to gamble or watch porn on the web." My technicians say that doing this kind of stuff with pfSense nowadays is not easy. They can implement some filters using IP addresses but not by using the names of the domains and categories. So, we are not able to exclude some categories from the allowed traffic, such as porn, gambling, etc. To do that, we have to use another product and another web filter that uses DNS. I know that there are some third-party products that could work with pfSense, but I'd like the native pfSense solution to do that."

"It's just not listed as FIPS compliant for where we're at now in government, which is an issue."

"The security could be improved."

"I would like a management console to manage multiple pfSense installs. We have five or six pfSense hardware devices installed. As far as I know, there is no single, unified pane of glass that I can use to manage multiple appliances. That's the one thing I wish I had, just having a good single unified configuration interface for each install."

"I want pfSense to add some next-generation firewall features."

"We appreciate the flexibility of the Netgate pfSense solution, but we have waited approximately two years for new updates to the Community Edition. We are now moving to OPNsense."

"We are at the moment looking to use it as a proxy service so that we can limit what websites people go and view and that sort of thing. That's an area I've struggled with a little bit at the moment and it could be a bit easier to set up."

More Netgate pfSense cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its price is normal. If I compare it with other vendors, such as Palo Alto, it's normal. Palo Alto is expensive."

"The price range is quite acceptable and normal."

"Compared to other firewall products, it's a little cheaper in terms of pricing."

"Pricing and licensing is a little bit complicated in FortiGate. They are always on the higher side. This is one issue that we always raise with the company that they should reduce the price according to Indian market requirements. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."

"The cost of Fortinet FortiGate is competitive and not expensive compared to other enterprise- grade solutions. On average, the license cost per year is around seventy percent of the firewall's purchase price."

"Licensing is usually on a three-year period."

"It's a very full-featured and it's priced well solution."

"FortiGate's pricing falls within the mid-range when compared to other leading firewall solutions."

More Fortinet FortiGate pricing and cost advice

"The solution is expensive. It's more expensive than the solution I previously used. Compared with the other cloud-based solutions, it's very competitive."

"It is appropriately priced for what they're doing for us. Considering the protection provided, I feel their pricing is spot-on."

"We save a ton of money and time. Previously, the numerous hits that we were receiving from our security tools, prior to implementing them, had to all be chased down, dispositioned, and endpoints had to be reimaged. It was just a ton of effort to do all that. That is where the savings from time and money come in."

"The licensing model needs improvement, especially for home users. There should be more flexibility to change licenses with hardware changes. The pricing model could be more accessible for home users."

"It has almost zero cost, and it is open to us. It runs on a small appliance just for a couple of 100 bucks, and I've never had an appliance burn out on me yet."

"Netgate pfSense is a cost-effective option. If you're not using VPN, you can acquire a decent embedded PC for around a hundred dollars and install pfSense on it, effectively creating a robust firewall solution. With this setup, you can achieve a throughput of two hundred to three hundred megabits per second (Mbps) without any issues, provided you're handling relatively simple rules. The level of performance depends on the specific requirements and tasks."

"There is an open-source community version that is available."

"pfSense is open-source, but the support is something that the customer pays for."

"Unlike many firewalls that require annual licensing fees, making them expensive for small businesses, pfSense is an affordable option."

"I like the fact that it is open-source."

"There is no license. You don't have to pay anything. It's completely free."

More Netgate pfSense pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Educational Organization

20%

Computer Software Company

14%

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Manufacturing Company

Healthcare Company

Computer Software Company

15%

Comms Service Provider

11%

Government

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

Which is the better NGFW: Fortinet Fortigate or Cisco Firepower?

When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage a...

See all answers

What is the biggest difference between Sophos XG and FortiGate?

From my experience regarding both the Sophos and FortiGate firewalls, I personally would rather use FortiGate. I know...

See all answers

What are the biggest technical differences between Sophos UTM and Fortinet FortiGate?

As a solution, Sophos UTM offers a lot of functionality, it scales well, and the stability and performance are quite ...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Help me find the best open source router

You don't really specify what type of router you are looking for but if you are talking about a gateway router I reco...

See all answers

How do I choose between Fortinet FortiGate and pfSense?

Fortinet’s Fortigate is a firewall solution we use and are very much satisfied with its performance. We find Fortigat...

See all answers

What is the difference between PfSense and OPNsense?

Two of the most common and well recognized firewalls, PfSense and OPNsense both support site-to-site IPsec VPN and cl...

See all answers

Comparisons

Sophos XG vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 22% of the time

Cisco Secure Firewall vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 11% of the time

WatchGuard Firebox vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 5% of the time

SonicWall TZ vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 5% of the time

Meraki MX vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 4% of the time

More Fortinet FortiGate Competitors

Cisco Umbrella vs Menlo Secure

Compared 22% of the time

Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks vs Menlo Secure

Compared 16% of the time

Prisma Access Browser vs Menlo Secure

Compared 14% of the time

Symantec Endpoint Security vs Menlo Secure

Compared 13% of the time

Zscaler Internet Access vs Menlo Secure

Compared 11% of the time

More Menlo Secure Competitors

OPNsense vs Netgate pfSense

Compared 34% of the time

Sophos XG vs Netgate pfSense

Compared 9% of the time

KerioControl vs Netgate pfSense

Compared 4% of the time

Cisco Secure Firewall vs Netgate pfSense

Compared 3% of the time

Sophos UTM vs Netgate pfSense

Compared 2% of the time

More Netgate pfSense Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Fortinet FortiGate

May 2025

Download Fortinet FortiGate product report

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure

April 2025

Download Menlo Secure product report

Buyer's Guide

Netgate pfSense

April 2025

Download Netgate pfSense product report

Also Known As

FortiGate 60b, FortiGate 60c, FortiGate 80c, FortiGate 50b, FortiGate 200b, FortiGate 110c, FortiGate, Fortinet Firewall

Menlo Security Web Security, Menlo Web Security

No data available

Overview

Fortinet FortiGate offers comprehensive network security and firewall protection across multiple locations. It effectively manages data traffic and secures environments with features like VPN, intrusion prevention, and UTM controls.

Organizations rely on Fortinet FortiGate for its robust integration with advanced security policies, ensuring significant protection for enterprises, cloud environments, and educational sectors. It facilitates network segmentation, application-level security, and authentication management, securing communication within and between locations such as branches and data centers. Its efficient SD-WAN and UTM features enable streamlined data management and enhanced threat protection capabilities. Users appreciate its centralized management, facilitating seamless operations across diverse environments.

What are the key features of Fortinet FortiGate?

VPN Capabilities: Ensure secure remote access for users and seamless site-to-site connections.
Intrusion Prevention System (IPS): Detect and prevent security threats and vulnerabilities.
Advanced Firewall: Offers robust firewalling with application control and web filtering.
SD-WAN: Optimizes application performance and enhances bandwidth management.
SSL VPN: Provides reliable and secure access for remote workers.

What benefits should users expect from Fortinet FortiGate?

High-performance Security: Delivers effective threat mitigation with high availability.
Centralized Management: Simplifies network operations with cloud-based management tools.
Detailed Analytics: Provides comprehensive insights into network activity and security threats.
Load Balancing: Ensures optimal resource distribution and traffic management.

Fortinet FortiGate is crucial in sectors like education, offering robust networks for secure data flow between campuses and facilitating remote learning. In enterprise environments, it allows efficient management of application traffic and security across multiple branches, while in the cloud, it seamlessly integrates with diverse platforms to enhance security infrastructure.

Fortinet

Menlo Security Secure Application Access

Menlo Security Secure Application Access makes zero trust access easy, giving users secure connectivity to private applications, including web and legacy applications. At the core of Secure Application Access is the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser, which fetches, secures and delivers the content for users.

In addition to providing simple-to-deploy, clientless ZTA, Secure Application Access and the Menlo Secure Cloud Browser protect applications from attacks such as session hijacking, cookie manipulation, and other tactics that employ protocol manipulation.

Secure Application Access protects applications from Internet threats and provides granular controls for added protection of the application and associated data. These security controls include Read-only/Read-write, Upload/download, Copy/paste, AV scanning, Sandboxing, and Data Loss Prevention.

Last Mile Data Protection

Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection identifies and prevents sensitive data from leaving your company by meticulously inspecting all file uploads and user input across browsing sessions. Leveraging the Secure Cloud Browser, users are protected from the internet and you can protect your organization from data loss with comprehensive traffic monitoring and controls. This approach addresses the growing concerns surrounding data leakage in the age of AI tools like ChatGPT.

By identifying sensitive data through file types, regular expressions, or predefined libraries, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection empowers security teams to regulate data input into AI platforms and prevent unauthorized uploads. This capability provides crucial protection for intellectual property, PII, and other confidential information.

The solution leverages the Menlo Cloud Security Platform's visibility and control over traffic to reliably detect and prevent data leaks originating from both browser submission forms and non-browser traffic. With the ability to inspect encrypted web traffic, Menlo Last-Mile Data Protection enforces DLP policies consistently across all users and devices, ensuring comprehensive data protection.

Menlo Security

Netgate pfSense is widely leveraged by organizations for its comprehensive capabilities in firewalls, VPN servers, and bandwidth management. It suits LAN, WAN, and DMZ networks, offering secure, scalable, and efficient networking solutions.

Netgate pfSense stands out in diverse environments with its enterprise-grade features and cost-effective operations compared to competitors like Cisco. Deployed as an edge device, it optimizes routing, ad-blocking, content filtering, and traffic shaping. Users benefit from its versatile configurations, robust firewall protection, VPN functionality, and ISP load balancing. The open-source nature allows for extensive customization, integrating plugins like Snort and pfBlockerNG, and compatibility with third-party tools enhances its utility. The intuitive GUI combined with detailed logging and centralized management fortifies network security.

What features define Netgate pfSense?

Firewall: Provides robust network security through advanced filtering and stateful packet inspections.
VPN: Ensures secure remote access with high-performing VPN capabilities.
Load Balancing: Efficiently distributes traffic across multiple ISPs, ensuring uptime and performance.
Customization: Supports various plugins for enhanced functionality, tailor-made to specific needs.
Scalability: Adapts easily to varying network demands, providing high availability and flexibility.

What benefits should be considered for ROI?

Cost-Effectiveness: Delivers premium features at a fraction of the cost of traditional network appliances.
Flexibility: Offers a customizable solution that integrates well with existing infrastructure.
Community Support: Backed by a strong user community offering insights and troubleshooting resources.
Security: Supports VLAN segmentation, enhancing protection and management of network traffic.

Organizations in industries such as finance, healthcare, and education find Netgate pfSense integral due to its advanced security features and cost benefits. Its scalable architecture and strong VPN support are crucial for industries requiring stringent data protection and reliable remote access. The adaptability of pfSense makes it suitable for dynamic environments seeking comprehensive, secure networking solutions.

Netgate

Sample Customers

Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, IBM, Cisco, Dell, HP, Oracle, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Vodafone, Orange, BT Group, Telstra, Deutsche Telekom, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, CenturyLink, NTT Communications, Tata Communications, SoftBank, China Mobile, Singtel, Telus, Rogers Communications, Bell Canada, Telkom Indonesia, Telkom South Africa, Telmex, Telia Company, Telkom Kenya

Information Not Available

Nerds On Site Inc., RKC Development Inc., Expertech, Fisher's Technology, Ncisive, Consulting, CPURX, Vaughn's Computer House Calls, Imeretech LLC, Digital Crisis, Carolina Digital Phone, Technigogo Technology Services, The Simple Solution, SwiftecITInc, Rocky Mountain Tech Team, Free Range Geeks, Alaska Computer Geeks, Lark Information Technology, Renaissance Systems Inc., Cutting Edge Computers, Caretech LLC, GoVanguard, Network Touch Ltd, P.C. Solutions.Net, Vision Voice and Data Systems LLC, Montgomery Technologies, Techforce, Concero Networks, ASONInc, CPS Electronics and Consulting, Darkwire.net LLC, IT Specialists, MBS-Net Inc., VOICE1 LLC, Advantage Networking Inc., Powerhouse Systems, Doxa Multimedia Inc., Pro Computer Service, Virtual IT Services, A&J Computers Inc., Envision IT LLC, CommunicaONE Inc., Bone Computer Inc., Amax Engineering Corporation, QPG Ltd. Co., IT 101 Inc., Perfect Cloud Solutions, Applied Technology Group Inc., The Digital Sun Group LLC, Firespring

Buyer's Guide

Menlo Secure vs. Netgate pfSense

April 2025

Free Report: Menlo Secure vs. Netgate pfSense

Find out what your peers are saying about Menlo Secure vs. Netgate pfSense and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

850,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Menlo Secure vs. Netgate pfSense 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.