We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and Palo Alto Networks based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Both products received high marks from users. Meraki MX has a slight edge in this comparison. According to its reviewers, it is easier to deploy and more reasonably priced than Palo Alto Networks.
"The flexibility and ease of configuration are the most valuable features."
"FortiGate Secure SD-WAN includes best-of-breed next-generation firewall (NGFW) security, SD-WAN, advanced routing, and WAN optimization capabilities, delivering a security-driven networking WAN edge transformation in a unified offering."
"Valuable features include the Web Application Firewall, and it even has DLP (data leak prevention)."
"The main benefit is the grouping of our security monitoring."
"It increases security posture and is helpful for firewall reporting, intrusion protection, web filtering, and SD-WAN implementation."
"Fortigate's most valuable feature is that it doesn't need a push policy when writing rules."
"We use the FortiGate Sandbox to detect zero-day vulnerabilities, such as anomalies or malware, that are unknown and have not yet been discovered."
"The response is very quick and they can visually resolve our problems in a short period."
"What I like best about Meraki MX is that it's easy to deploy remotely. The product works. It has automatic updates. I also like that Meraki MX is a brilliant device. You turn it on, stick the key in there, activate it, and then you're done. Meraki MX does what my customers need at the end of the day, so I also like that."
"To me, the analytics feature is one of the most valuable in Meraki MX. I also find that it has good usability as it's cloud-based. Another valuable feature of Meraki MX is that it's simple to use and it's user-friendly."
"I think cloud management is key. The cloud management and support are the two things that make the product great."
"It is very easy to use and manage. It is also very easy to scale."
"I love the simplicity of Meraki MX — specifically, the simplicity of the dashboard."
"Real Auto VPN with load balancer without needing a public IP. It is simple and functional."
"A strong, reliable solution for small companies with little or no dedicated IT department."
"I use Meraki in my POCs and with my customers as well."
"The most important feature is the firewall. We can make rules to filter the application layer of traffic. It's a very helpful feature."
"I like that they are more stable than the previous ones, and they allow a lot of other features."
"The solution is user-friendly. It's secure and easy to understand your network visibility, control the network, and prevent attacks."
"Compared to other firewalls from Check Point, Fortinet, and Cisco, for example, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls use the most advanced techniques. They have sandbox integration and others in the orchestrator. Palo Alto's security features are at a higher level than those of the competitors at the moment."
"The application IDs, application controls, URL filtering, visibility, monitoring, and reporting are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features are the threat prevention and policy-based routing features."
"Good functionality and features."
"The solution allows us to set parameters on where our users can go. We can block certain sites or ads if we want to."
"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."
"There could be more integration between the logging and analytical platforms to make it more seamless and integrated."
"I think the only issue that needs improvement is the interface."
"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."
"The monitor and the visibility, in this proxy, is very weak."
"If they had better integration with security products, such as Cisco ISE or Rapid Threat Containment, then it would be an improvement."
"Fortinet Fortigate could benefit by simplifying some of their processes."
"Pricing for it is a bit high. It could be cheaper."
"It would be great if the Meraki devices let us see, in real time, the internet demand on a single device."
"The configuration options for firewall and IPS have limitations."
"The whole Cisco Meraki range requires easier access for cameras. For a security center, it would be helpful to have easier access to cameras through the portal. Its licensing cost could also be better."
"The product is quite complex to set up."
"We could have more reporting options and the ability to send alarms to the administrator."
"When we do API integrations with Meraki, they have always been hard as well as tedious to build. The data that we want out of the API integrations has been only recently available. Six months ago, it was hard to get someone to build something correctly or useful with Meraki APIs. Recently, they have made more data available on the API, but it is just a start. They need to do more."
"It would be nice if the different services, including the SIEM SOC and endpoint detection and response (EDR) were integrated into one, so that I don't have to go to different vendors for different services."
"FortiGate is cheaper than Meraki. Even the license renewal is less than Meraki."
"It's too expensive."
"From a documentation standpoint, there is room for improvement. Even Palo Alto says that their documentation is terrible."
"The solution has normal authentication, but does not have two-factor or multi-factor authentication. There is room for development there."
"There has been a recent change in the graphical interface. For the monitoring part, they could have a better UI."
"The solution needs some management tool enhancements. It could also use more reporting tools."
"Having a better pricing model would make this product more competitive, and more affordable for our customers."
"Palo Alto could do better with integrating the Palo Alto Next-Gen Firewall with SD-WAN. The biggest issue with Palo Alto is that they are expensive. They are very expensive for what they offer. They should improve their pricing."
"Enhancements could potentially be made to the firmware to improve its inspectability."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 57 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 161 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". Meraki MX is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ, Netgate pfSense and SonicWall NSa, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense and Cisco Secure Firewall. See our Meraki MX vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls 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.