Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Palo Alto Networks VM-Series based on the interviews we conducted with its users.
The top alternative solutions include Fortinet FortiGate, Netgate pfSense, and OPNsense.
The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.
Palo Alto Networks Alternatives Report
Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Palo Alto Networks, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Fortinet FortiGate offers affordability and flexibility with strong integration features, appealing to those prioritizing competitive pricing and cost-effectiveness. In comparison, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series emphasizes advanced threat intelligence and WildFire malware prevention, attracting buyers seeking superior threat prevention and centralized management capabilities.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series offers comprehensive threat prevention and strong security integration, appealing to buyers needing advanced security. In comparison, OPNsense provides efficient packet filtering and customization, making it ideal for those prioritizing cost-effectiveness and open-source flexibility.
Sophos XG offers user-friendliness and cost-efficient network security. In comparison, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series provides strong application filtering and enterprise-scale security. Tech buyers may prefer Sophos XG for its simplicity and value, while others may choose Palo Alto for advanced threat intelligence in cloud environments.
Sophos XG features lower setup costs, making it a budget-friendly choice, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series demands a higher initial investment, highlighting its extensive security capabilities and advanced features.
Sophos XG features lower setup costs, making it a budget-friendly choice, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series demands a higher initial investment, highlighting its extensive security capabilities and advanced features.
Cisco Secure Firewall appeals for its pricing and support. In comparison, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series stands out for its extensive features. Cisco is praised for ease of deployment, while Palo Alto excels in long-term ROI. Buyers seeking affordability might choose Cisco; those valuing features might prefer Palo Alto.
The Cisco Secure Firewall has a moderate setup cost, while the Palo Alto Networks VM-Series incurs a higher initial investment. Cisco Secure Firewall is noted for its cost-effectiveness during installation compared to Palo Alto Networks VM-Series.
The Cisco Secure Firewall has a moderate setup cost, while the Palo Alto Networks VM-Series incurs a higher initial investment. Cisco Secure Firewall is noted for its cost-effectiveness during installation compared to Palo Alto Networks VM-Series.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series offers advanced security features and easy cloud deployment, ideal for organizations prioritizing cloud integration. In comparison, Check Point NGFW provides robust, customizable security with comprehensive threat intelligence, making it suitable for complex on-premise and hybrid cloud environments seeking layered protection.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series offers advanced security features such as deep packet inspection and threat prevention, ideal for comprehensive protection. In comparison, Azure Firewall excels with seamless integration within Azure services and easy scalability, making it a preferred choice for Azure-centric environments.
Juniper SRX Series Firewall offers competitive pricing and solid customer support, attracting cost-conscious buyers. In comparison, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series stands out with advanced features and perceived value. Juniper SRX emphasizes simplicity and performance, while Palo Alto prioritizes comprehensive security and long-term ROI.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is recognized for advanced threat prevention and integration capabilities. In comparison, Fortinet FortiGate-VM excels in secure SD-WAN and cloud compatibility. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series stands out for deployment ease, while Fortinet FortiGate-VM is favored for budget-friendly pricing and ROI.
SonicWall NSa excels in ease of use and pricing, making it accessible for many organizations. In comparison, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series offers advanced features and robust performance. SonicWall NSa is appreciated for its comprehensive threat management, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series delivers superior next-generation firewall capabilities.
KerioControl attracts tech buyers with cost-effectiveness and ease of deployment. In comparison, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series appeals due to advanced features and strong ROI. A buyer might prioritize KerioControl for budget needs, while another might prefer Palo Alto Networks for superior security and integration.
KerioControl's setup cost is affordable for smaller businesses while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series has a higher initial setup cost reflecting its advanced features tailored for larger enterprises.
KerioControl's setup cost is affordable for smaller businesses while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series has a higher initial setup cost reflecting its advanced features tailored for larger enterprises.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series excels with advanced security and cloud integration, making it ideal for those needing comprehensive threat management. In comparison, Sangfor NGAF offers cost-effective essential security features, attracting smaller businesses with budget constraints seeking basic protection and user-friendly application control.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series stands out for deployment efficiency and customer support. In comparison, Huawei NGFW excels in its feature set and cost-effectiveness. Buyers may opt for VM-Series for straightforward implementation, while the rich features of Huawei NGFW attract budget-conscious organizations seeking scalable solutions.
The setup cost for Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is higher compared to Huawei NGFW, which offers a more cost-effective setup option. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is known for its advanced features and robust security, while Huawei NGFW provides a budget-friendly alternative.
The setup cost for Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is higher compared to Huawei NGFW, which offers a more cost-effective setup option. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is known for its advanced features and robust security, while Huawei NGFW provides a budget-friendly alternative.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security has an edge in deployment speed, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series excels in robust features. In comparison, Check Point focuses on advanced threat prevention and cost-effectiveness. Palo Alto provides seamless scalability and is justified by its performance capabilities.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is noted for its lower initial setup costs, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is frequently highlighted for its more expensive setup process. Check Point's simpler deployment contrasts with Palo Alto's higher upfront investment.
Check Point CloudGuard Network Security is noted for its lower initial setup costs, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is frequently highlighted for its more expensive setup process. Check Point's simpler deployment contrasts with Palo Alto's higher upfront investment.
Hillstone E-Series offers cost-effective pricing with strong support and performance. In comparison, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series provides advanced threat prevention and scalability. Hillstone E-Series is noted for straightforward deployment, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series features justify its higher cost and ROI.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is favored for its in-depth security features and advanced threat protection. In comparison, Zscaler Cloud Firewall excels with its cloud-native architecture and ease of use. Palo Alto Networks offers granular control, while Zscaler simplifies deployment in cloud environments.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series setup costs are often considered higher due to its robust feature set, while Zscaler Cloud Firewall setup costs are seen as more economical, reflecting its cloud-native approach.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series setup costs are often considered higher due to its robust feature set, while Zscaler Cloud Firewall setup costs are seen as more economical, reflecting its cloud-native approach.
Juniper vSRX is praised for scalability and cost-effectiveness, with a focus on high performance and user-friendly configuration management. In comparison, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series excels in advanced threat prevention, including robust intrusion prevention and comprehensive application control, making it a preferred choice for superior security.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series excels in application control, threat prevention, and deep packet inspection. In comparison, SonicWall NSv provides ease of VPN setup, effective malware detection, and budget-friendly pricing. Buyers choose Palo Alto Networks for advanced functionalities, while SonicWall NSv appeals for cost efficiency.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series has a higher initial setup cost, whereas SonicWall NSv offers a more affordable setup, highlighting a key financial difference between the two solutions.
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series has a higher initial setup cost, whereas SonicWall NSv offers a more affordable setup, highlighting a key financial difference between the two solutions.
