We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and Sophos XG based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Sophos XG received better user ratings. Although the two solutions are comparable in most areas, Meraki MX lacks a lot of features in comparison with Sophos XG.
"The inspection and web security features are most valuable."
"The tool is a nice product and easy to handle. The software's user interface is also good. You can easily implement remote access in the solution."
"Its administrative panel is very intuitive and simple. It is simpler than the other solutions that we had. As an administrator, we are always looking for the easiest solution to manage network policies. We are able to filter everything on our network and also use the VPN feature, which is important these days when people are working remotely during COVID."
"The most valuable features are the enterprise modeling and the simple interface."
"We purchased Fortinet because of the pricing, its functionality, because it met our requirements, and the total cost of ownership over five years was quite reasonable. In the market, Fortinet is rated quite well."
"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 remote access, web filtering, and IPS."
"It is a good source for firewall protection."
"We've had no issues with the scalability or the stability of this solution"
"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."
"We work also with domain control (DC) from Microsoft or Amazon. We use a whole virtual appliance with Meraki."
"The most valuable feature is that we didn't have any problems with Meraki MX."
"They have very good technical support and I have relied heavily on them."
"It is very fast to implement."
"We switched to Meraki because it lets you see what's happening in your LAN and WAN in a graphic and web environment."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The most valuable features of Sophos XG are the ease of management and good out-of-the-box reporting."
"It is feature-rich, I like the server authentication, and the reports are good."
"Sophos XG is easy to use."
"The initial setup is pretty easy."
"Web filtering is easy enough to deploy, manage, or make exceptions to."
"We created and configured a VPN for connecting our remote sites and also to make it more secure and reliable. We also like its two-factor authentication features."
"The most valuable features of Sophos XG for our use cases are its firewall capabilities, its ability to connect to wide area and local networks, and its VPN functionality."
"The user interface is very good. It's already quite simple and easy to use."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"The solution could be more evenly structured."
"It is stable, but its stability can be improved."
"We had some issues in the beginning while setting it up, but after doing the firmware update, it is working fine."
"The central management for the FortiGate Fortinet Firewall needs improvement. They have the manager to do the essential management for both SD-WAN and for the security policy. They should also improve the SD-WAN function."
"It needs more available central management."
"When we cluster the two Fortinet FortiGate boxes together we have some issues."
"The scalability could be better."
"The security is not as strong as it could be"
"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."
"They need to improve the link between Meraki and Active Directory."
"Direct logging is something that can be introduced. In the absence of cloud management, the possibility of local configurations and on-premise logins becomes restricted. This limitation stands as a primary concern. When it comes to resolving issues, the inability to access login options hampers troubleshooting efforts. The stability is noteworthy; but when compared to alternative products, its stability is comparatively lower. Additionally, certain limitations are observed in terms of remote control. Price-wise, the solution stands out for its competitive and cost-effective nature compared to other alternatives. Operationally, it is user-friendly and requires minimal effort from administrators, making configuration hassle-free."
"As far as what needs to be improved — nothing really comes to mind. It does what we need it to do."
"The only stability issue is in Content Filtering. Sometimes we need to report these types of issues to Cisco support."
"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."
"We had minor issues with Meraki MX. We had a couple of RMAs, so that could be an area for improvement, but in terms of how the RMAs went, the turnaround time and getting those back into redeployment were quick. Another area for improvement in Meraki MX is that when you're scaling for multiple locations, you need to use the same model, but the model you'd need is only available for a short time. The specific model you require could be out of stock, or Meraki isn't making that model anymore, so Meraki should improve that."
"The solution’s reporting could be improved."
"The vendor doesn’t publish the price on the website."
"The pricing can be high unless you choose a longer contract."
"Since Sophos took over Cyberoam, the online technical library and support library have become super messy. To get a piece of information is becoming a nightmare. They need to reorganize the online technical support and technical library."
"Sophos XG could improve the policies, they are a bit confusing when creating them. There are many options that make it confusing and it could be simplified."
"The installation could be faster and is longer than that of other solutions, lasting more than a month instead of five minutes."
"The VPN is in need of improvement."
"The UTM itself needs improvement. When you're navigating it seems like it takes forever to load anything. The hardware is okay. It's just the software that could be more responsive."
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 58 reviews while Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while Sophos XG is rated 8.2. 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 Sophos XG writes "Easy to use and deploy with an improved pricing structure in place". Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, SonicWall TZ, Netgate pfSense and SonicWall NSa, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Sophos XGS, SonicWall TZ and Sophos UTM. See our Meraki MX vs. Sophos XG 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.
Meraki is designed for zero deployments and no in-house firewall specialist personnel. Best to secure Networks like remote offices, branches or home offices. Also to protect Internet Access (your computer accesses the internet).
Sophos is more of a professional firewall, not only protecting internet access but also providing security for publishing services like web servers, data centers, central services. They will need a specialist to install and support them. Therefore offer much more sophisticated protection features.
So, you can't really compare these solutions as they are targeting different markets.
Meraki MX is a small business product and lacks a lot of features compared to Sophos XG/XGS.
- IPsec IKEv2 does not work (it is in the menu, but does not work and can only be enabled by meraki support)
- no SSLVPN or IPsec VPN client. AnyConnect can only be tested with beta firmware.
Cisco Client VPN (L2TP) is a total joke - not sure for who it is meant for?
- no user based firewall rules (for VPN)
- no firewall rule grouping
- no masquerade option for DNAT (sometimes it is very useful if I can do a DNAT with masquerade to another subnet)
- no VLAN tagging support on WAN port (would be usable for IPTV - solvable if WAN is bypassed through a managed switch)
- no multiple IP support on WAN port (Sophos has alias support on every interface, which means that multiple IP addresses can be added on the same LAN or WAN port)
- no LAG or LACP support (would be usable to connect aggregation switch to firewall to bypass more traffic through the MX)
- no DAC cable support for SFP port (why I do have to use optical cable to connect aswitch?)
- no custom IPS policies - only on/off button
- no e-mail protection option (Sophos has it with extra license)
- no web server protection (Sophos has it with extra license)
- no sandstorm option (most firewalls have it with extra license)
- hardware may probably too weak compared to the user count
- no BGP, OSPF routing
- no multiple VPN user groups and LDAP servers
Cisco mx64, for example, has 2 WANs, is very practical and simple for the two services, has a balancing for two internet services and bandwidth control (by groups and users).