We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and Zscaler Internet Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Unified Threat Management (UTM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Meraki MX is I can manage the solution from anywhere remotely, I can throttle bandwidth, and create all rules. Additionally, it is secure for our customers."
"Dual WAN connections are greatly simplified and point-to-point VPNs automatically connect regardless of what WAN connection is active."
"I love the simplicity of Meraki MX — specifically, the simplicity of the dashboard."
"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."
"The technical support people from Meraki are brilliant."
"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."
"Point-to-point VPNs can dynamically follow IP changes with no need for static IPs."
"Easy to deploy with a simple configuration."
"The data loss prevention feature is the most valuable. It stops our users from inadvertently leaking our customers' data to the Internet or anywhere else it shouldn't go."
"The solution is scalable and stable."
"There is no lag in service when accessing the internet."
"Zscaler Internet Access protects using data loss prevention. If you have a CASB exposing your cloud out into the network, then Zscaler Internet Access will go ahead and control that unknown cloud application in the CASB, protecting it. There is also data detection with exact data match. This improves the data coming into your cloud so you are protecting it."
"Zscaler Internet Access has helped us reduce the time that we spend managing security policies by about four hours a week. We can use this time to focus on other things, especially the IT team."
"It is easy to set up the solution."
"The solution replaces multiple vendor technologies with one which makes it worth the cost."
"Zscaler Internet Access's best feature is the granular policy controls."
"They're very complacent and I find the rule set to be a little arcane."
"An area for improvement in Meraki MX is that it needs some provision, as supplying the unit through Cisco can be tedious at times, but as far as the product itself and its offerings, Meraki MX is five-star all the way."
"They need to improve the link between Meraki and Active Directory."
"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."
"Meraki has some hidden features and information that is only privy to their engineers. If that information became available to us, then it would improve our ease of management, and we would be able to make certain adjustments instead of having to go to them."
"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."
"You cannot use switching behaviors as you see on the Meraki switch."
"We have been having a problem with the VPN. When the energy goes down and is back again, the VPN link doesn't get established. We have to manually turn off the modems and other pieces of equipment and manually establish the VPN. It has been around one month since we have been having this problem, and we don't have enough support from Meraki to solve the problem."
"What could be improved in Zscaler Internet Access is its price. It could be cheaper."
"The performance needs improvement. Some areas create performance issues and, depending on the use cases, require reconfiguration to perform again."
"The solution is expensive. They recently revised the pricing and packaging. Some of our existing customers have been asking for alternate solutions for a lower price."
"There are a few features that are not compatible with the Azure cloud."
"Zscaler Internet Access could improve by adding a VPN feature."
"The solution can be improved by advancing some of the newer technologies such as the DLP feature, and adding email security."
"I would like to see more training and video documentation."
"The reporting functionality could be a bit easier to use. There is a reporting function, but it's quite hard to do any good reporting, from a user-management perspective. For example, if a department manager wants to know how his department is using the web, there is a way to get the data, but it's quite cumbersome to get it and show it well. And that's true for comparing between departments."
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 13 reviews while Zscaler Internet Access is ranked 2nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 22 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.8, while Zscaler Internet Access is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Makes it easy to stay on top of everything for security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Internet Access writes " AI decision-making on quarantined documents reduces manual work". Meraki MX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Sophos XG, whereas Zscaler Internet Access is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Netskope CASB, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Forcepoint Secure Web Gateway and Palo Alto Networks WildFire. See our Meraki MX vs. Zscaler Internet Access report.
We monitor all Unified Threat Management (UTM) 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.
