We performed a comparison between Cisco Secure Network Analytics and Fortinet FortiClient based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in Network Monitoring Software."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The solution has increased our threat detection rate. Cisco Stealthwatch has not reduced our incident response times. It has not reduced the amount of time it takes us to detect immediate threats. It has reduced false positives."
"The most valuable part is that Stealthwatch is part of a portfolio of security devices from Cisco. Cisco literally can touch every single end point, every single ingress and egress point in the network. Nobody else has that."
"It provides good visibility to the customers. People are still evaluating it, but it provides visibility and helps them to take action to remediate and mitigate the issues that are highlighted on the dashboard. It has good integration with the Cisco switching platform."
"I believe this solution has reduced our incident response time."
"There are already many functionalities, so I don't think there is anything to improve."
"From a security standpoint, it is just seeing pockets as well. Visibility is very key for us."
"It is a good application, providing for real-time monitoring of the organization of data. It can basically identify points of peak traffic where possible issues are being caused."
"It has been pretty stable since we deployed it, and everything seems to be working fine."
"What I like most about FortiClient is that it's easy to use. The way it displays information is very straightforward."
"What I find valuable in FortiClient is its patch management capabilities, allowing remote updates efficiently."
"We mainly use this solution because we have many Fortinet solutions like antivirus and SSL assessment."
"FortiClient's most valuable features are that it's easy to install and connect and has OTP on email IDs and two-factor authentication."
"The EMS server gives us good control and central management."
"When the user gets authenticated, I can assign a different VPN or network to each user."
"It is a feature-rich product that is easy to use and install without sacrificing security."
"The initial setup is very good."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"It's a good solid solution but integration with Network Access Control products with Cisco ISE would be good."
"I would like to see better filters."
"The customizability of the UI should improve."
"One area that could be improved in SNA is the integration with Cisco ISE for user and session details, which currently requires additional setup."
"Reliance on Java. Get away from that."
"The initial setup was straightforward but required a lot of data entry, to begin with building out the server types and network types."
"Stealthwatch is still maturing in AI. It uses artificial intelligence for predictions, but AI still needs to mature. It is in a phase where you get 95% correct detection. As its AI engine learns more, it will become more accurate. This is applicable to all the devices that are using AI because they support both supervised and unsupervised machine learning. The accuracy in the case of supervised machine learning is dependent on the data you feed into the box. The accuracy in the case of unsupervised machine learning is dependent on the algorithm. The algorithm matures depending on retrospective learning, and this is how it is able to detect zero-day attacks."
"It's not great as a standalone solution."
"Technical support is awful. Their online response time is not prompt. They should not respond after four or five days. Their support guys are not competent enough. Small issues are taking time."
"They have an EDR feature for end protection detection and response, and this is actually with an add-on subscription, which is charged separately. What I would like to see is this included with the base cost."
"The licensing feature of the product requires improvement since whenever the license expires, the tool logs out its users automatically, irrespective of whether they are on the network or not, which can be problematic for me."
"The tool needs to improve its web filtering feature. Its support quality needs improvement. We speak different languages, and this can create misunderstandings."
"FortiClient is not communicating with the new version of the firewall."
"Fortinet FortiClient could improve the connection because sometimes it drops."
"When we change our endpoint, we have to connect again, which means having to enter our credentials and permissions."
"It would be extremely useful to have an automatic updating feature."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Cisco Secure Network Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Secure Network Analytics is ranked 24th in Network Monitoring Software with 58 reviews while Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 86 reviews. Cisco Secure Network Analytics is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Secure Network Analytics writes "Increased the visibility of what is happening in our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". Cisco Secure Network Analytics is most compared with Darktrace, Cisco Secure Cloud Analytics, ThousandEyes, Vectra AI and Arista NDR, whereas Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.