We performed a comparison between Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Juniper SRX Series Firewall is highly regarded for its simplicity, intuitive interface, and exceptional customer assistance. It provides advantageous capabilities, including site-to-site VPN, effortless configuration, and a robust command line. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls excel in embedded machine learning, formidable security functionalities, and a cohesive platform. They present features such as application identification, DNS security, URL filtering, and GlobalProtect VPN.
Juniper SRX Series Firewall could enhance its capacity, reporting and alerts, user interface, device reliability, documentation, and feature set. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls would benefit from improved customization, configuration simplicity, machine learning capabilities, troubleshooting tools, documentation, user interface, VPN availability, and product stability.
Service and Support: Customers have generally found the customer service of Juniper SRX Series Firewall to be satisfactory, with helpful and knowledgeable support. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls have received mixed feedback, as some customers have praised the support while others have expressed dissatisfaction.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Juniper SRX Series Firewall is time-consuming, varying based on the environment's complexity. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls are known for their simplicity and ease of use. Palo Alto is considered more user-friendly and has a quicker deployment time.
Pricing: The setup cost for Juniper SRX Series Firewall is seen as simple, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls are considered to be more expensive than other vendors. Juniper's pricing is fair and within budget, while Palo Alto's pricing is justified considering the level of security and features offered.
ROI: Juniper SRX Series Firewall is praised for its reliability, consistent performance, and advanced security capabilities, which ultimately lead to a favorable return on investment. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls excel in providing better visibility, detailed reporting, and streamlined management, resulting in decreased administrative burden.
Comparison Results: Based on the comparison between Juniper SRX Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, it is evident that users prefer Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. This is due to its embedded machine learning for real-time attack prevention, strong security capabilities, and a unified platform that offers ease of use and maintenance. Users appreciate the advanced security features and user-friendly interface.
"The features that we have found most valuable are the SSL VPN and the User Portal."
"With FortiClient, you can easily connect when you are home, check out what you want to do, and connect to your network when you are not at work. You can switch on servers and you can check what is wrong."
"I only deal with it from a security analyst's point of view. I don't really get into the features of the actual FortiGate. From the security point of view, it works, and it does its job."
"It's great for capturing the traffic and troubleshooting it."
"FortiGate SD-WAN facilitated a smooth transition for our customers between their two internet service providers, ensuring uninterrupted connectivity without any downtime."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the rules and quality of service."
"We are very happy with the general bandwidth agility we have seen from one website to another website."
"I have found Fortinet FortiGate to be scalable."
"Juniper has the "recovery safety feature", so if you perform a "commit confirmed" and the new configuration disconnects you. then there is no "confirmed" command with X mins (default = 10 mins). It automatically reverts (recovers) to the previous configuration. This is handy for when you do not want to make that trip down range just to reboot a router."
"Most of our clients use it as a traditional firewall, blocking Layer 3 and Layer 4, blocking by transport."
"Juniper supports their products very well."
"It is a complete security bundle. The cloud-based Sky Advanced Threat Prevention feature is very valuable. I am 100% satisfied with the performance of the Juniper firewall. It has a very good throughput. It works very fine. We use our firewall as a site-to-site VPN or Software-Defined Wide Area Network (SD-WAN). In both cases, it has a very good and optimum performance. Their service support is very good in India. I get really good support from the Juniper team."
"Using a Juniper CLI, you configure a "candidate configuration", then "commit" it to bring it live. If you do not like it or messed up something, you just "rollback" to the previous configuration. It can all be done in a matter of minutes. This is super handy once you get use to it."
"When compared to Palo Alto, Juniper is a better choice when it comes to the enterprise network and connectivity."
"Troubleshooting with the solution is quite easy. If you compare the process to, for example, Fortigate, Juniper is much easier."
"We're primarily using Juniper's EPA feature, but not the other things. We use it to manage different points of firewalling of routing."
"The most valuable feature is the security provided by the ATP."
"Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls enabled us to have better visibility overall."
"I like the remote access and URL filtering features that are available on global products."
"One of the simple features I like about Palo Alto firewalls is that it's extremely easy to find out what's happening in the network. The reporting is phenomenal, and it's easy to find which threats have been detected and what traffic is going through the box. When a customer notices something is wrong, you can quickly check the amount of traffic going through the firewall around that time. If there is anything out of the ordinary, you can decide it needs to be investigated further."
"The most important part of this solution is its reliability, as it just works without any fancy features."
"I like that Palo Alto does a good job of keeping the firewall updated with the latest threat signatures."
"I like the architecture because it separates the management plan process and the data plan process."
"I love the Policy Optimizer feature. I am also completely happy with its stability."
"Its filtering is sometimes too precise or strict. We sometimes have to bypass and authorize some of the sites, but they get blocked. We know that they are trusted sites, but they are blocked, and we don't know why."
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by having more capabilities for troubleshooting VPN connections. For example, I do get some feedback about the current status, but I could use some history and logging of important events. The information is logged in our Syslog server, but I could use that information from the device. If they could provide a GUI to have some more insight on what's going with my VPN would be useful."
"Compared to some other products, the DLP is not at par for the moment."
"There are mainly two areas of improvement in Fortinet FortiGate— the licensing cost and the timing of upgrading licenses for boxes."
"One issue that I have had is that sometimes I need to monitor the traffic, so I need to filter it according to the user and which user is using it the most. I experience a bottleneck most of the time, particularly at the peak time when the number of contracts and users are at maximum."
"I would like to see improvements with the antivirus and IPS as they are not working properly all the time."
"Fortinet FortiGate can improve the integration with Active Directory. Additionally, I would like to have a Cloud Controller, such as they do in the Cisco Meraki solution."
"To the best of my knowledge, Fortinet does not have a CASB solution and Fortinet does not have a Zero trust solution."
"To compare with Fortinet, Juniper needs to improve their security features."
"Both the web management and the graphical user interface are inadequate and should be improved."
"The CLI is verbose. You have to say a lot to do a little. I don't like that part of it. Cisco's command syntax seems to be a good bit more concise. When you're trying to get something done, you don't want to have to type a bunch."
"It would be ideal if the solution could use cloud services to help update signatures or threat prevention systems."
"I would like to have a better web UI for administration. Juniper could simplify the web UI and make it more compatible with mobile devices."
"The product only has basic features."
"As a networking person, I don't really have any major issues with this device. Based on my experience of using it in a cluster, it could be more stable. I had an incident when one of the SRXs in a cluster couldn't learn ARP. It is a good solution, but firewalls don't seem to be an area of development for Juniper. They are focusing on data centers, routers, and switches, not firewalls."
"The solution isn't very granular or detailed."
"When there was change from IPv4 to IPv6, some of the firewalls still didn't support IPv6. In North America, we have seen most customers are using IPv6, as they are getting the IPv6 IPs from their ISPs. Sometimes, when they go through the firewall, it denies the traffic."
"Currently, they don't have email protection. They can maybe add it in the future. Currently, if you want to do so, you need to go with another solution."
"The user interface is a bit clumsy and not very user-friendly."
"I would like to see better integration with IoT technologies."
"The solution could offer better pricing. We'd like it if it could be a bit more affordable for us."
"We would like to see the external dynamic list for this solution improved. The current version does not automatically block malicious IP addresses, which would be very useful."
"The solution could be simplified."
"I would like them to improve their GUI interface, making it more user-friendly."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 86 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 162 reviews. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". 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". Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Check Point NGFW and Meraki MX, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Sophos XGS. See our Juniper SRX Series Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors and 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.