Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs Fortinet FortiGate comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 8, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.1
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Wireless LAN (4th)
Fortinet FortiGate
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
318
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (2nd), Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions (1st), WAN Edge (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Enterprise Networking solutions, they serve different purposes. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is designed for Wireless LAN and holds a mindshare of 13.1%, up 12.3% compared to last year.
Fortinet FortiGate, on the other hand, focuses on Firewalls, holds 20.7% mindshare, up 17.7% since last year.
Wireless LAN
Firewalls
 

Q&A Highlights

GW
Apr 03, 2023
 

Featured Reviews

Mageshwaran S - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables organizations to control many sites globally with a lean IT team and provides visibility into the user activities
The solution can handle only medium and small businesses. We face a bottleneck on the gateway while using the solution for large enterprises. The solution must be able to expand to larger enterprises. Currently, the MX device can support only up to 10,000 users. It would be good if it can go beyond 1 lakh users. Catalyst 9300 is coming on the Meraki Dashboard. The vendor must also bring in the 9400 and 9600 Catalyst series. It will be very helpful. We will not have any choke on the gateway. There is no active-active concept. It will be very helpful if the solution provides active-active. Now, we are doing an active-passive setup, which is a warm spare. If it is an active-active setup, the gateway bottleneck issue can be resolved. I would be able to segment the Wireless LAN IPs. It will help support 20,000 devices at a go. Meraki does not have a single dashboard. I need to port an on-premise controller. There is a bottleneck while scaling the product. I need to consider a lot of things.
EhabAli - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient, user-friendly, and affordable
In the past, NSS Labs was utilized to test files and verify the numbers and datasheets. It would be beneficial to have an organization or testing lab that can verify the numbers in our datasheets since changes are frequently made, which can be inconvenient for review. For instance, when comparing different competitors such as Forcepoint, Palo Alto, and Check Point, the throughput or numbers in the datasheet may be lower than the actual numbers. Conversely, Fortinet typically reports very high numbers, but they cannot be replicated in the real world. Therefore, it would be advantageous for them to partner with a neutral testing organization such as NSS Labs to validate these numbers, thus providing more credibility and comfort to everyone regarding the accuracy of the datasheets. For the migration, everyone has a firewall in use and I am selling Fortinet. Typically, I am replacing another firewall. Previously, there was a tool available to convert configurations from one firewall, such as Palo Alto, to Fortinet, but this tool is no longer free. If it could be made free again, it would be very beneficial. This tool shows a lot of promise and is very good. Making it free would help many companies deliver their products in a more efficient and integrated way. It would also be more valuable to include the tool with the firewall package or license instead of having to pay extra for it. Paying extra puts more pressure on small companies to deliver the firewall and complete the configuration, especially if they have hundreds or thousands of policies. It's very painful to move through these policies line by line. The stability has room for improvement. When it comes to Secure SD-WAN, everything is fine. They are going the right way. SD-WAN is very promising. They can provide the SD-WAN solution separately, but they will not take this approach because even the smallest firewall can support the features, so there is no need to have a separate service or appliance. They are following the right steps, and there is nothing to be improved. Feature-wise, I'm really satisfied with the new release, and the features they have added. For now, it's fine.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is easy to set up. You can do everything on the GUI. You don't need to trace cables. You don't need to connect to the switch. Everything is there, right in front of you."
"It's simple to manage when there's a problem."
"This product offers cloud-based configuration, so you can set it up from anywhere."
"I have found it to be stable."
"The most valuable feature is the stability. It works and doesn't stop."
"The automatic VMware update is very useful because you don't have to worry about outages and planning for VMware updates. It is very advantageous from a management point of view. The ability to restrict and review the clients connected to each of our segments. Additionally, the solution is easy to use."
"Its ability to be cloud-managed is the most valuable feature so if there's a reconfiguration or an issue, we have excellent visibility into the network and we can usually resolve the problem online without having to go onsite."
"The primary value lies in the ease of configuration; these products seamlessly integrate, and work well together."
"The solution is very user friendly. The user interface in particular is quite nice."
"Anti-Spam web content filterinG."
"The FortiGate controls the user's activities and maximizes my bandwidth use overall."
"From the firewall perspective, the rules and policies are very sufficient and easy to use."
"The management console is pretty simple, so anyone who understands networking can initially deploy the solution."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate are the ability to work in proxy mode, which other solutions, such as Palo Alto cannot. There are some features that are better that come at no extra license or subscriptions cost, such as basic SD-WAN. The DLT is useful, other solutions have the same feature too, such as Palo Alto."
"All of the features of Fortinet FortiGate are useful and the security protection is good."
"You can create multiple Virtual Domains (VDOMs), which are treated as separate firewall instances."
 

Cons

"The solution's pricing could be improved."
"The issue primarily revolves around failure to renew the license on time, leading to service termination."
"They should introduce a grace period of 60 days after license expiry because as it is now, it automatically goes down and there is no grace period."
"Updating the equipment and the scheme they use to bill for the license could be improved."
"Meraki is still very much a small office type of solution. It is not a fit for large enterprise networks, as it doesn't have tunneling functionalities."
"Overall the solution needs to have more time to mature."
"We'd like to have better mapping to showcase low-coverage areas."
"I would like to see them improve their support where an assigned engineer can take the case all the way to closure. Usually, you get a different engineer calling regarding the same ticket."
"The stability could be a bit better."
"I think there could be more QoS features"
"Fortinet FortiGate could improve by adding FortiAnalyzer to its solution, we should not have to use another solution. FortiAnalyzer can provide more detailed information."
"WAN load-balancing could be a lot better at detecting when a link is poor or inconsistent, and not just flat out dead."
"They should make the rule sets more understandable for the end user. When you're trying to explain to somebody how a computer network is secured, sometimes it's difficult for an end user or customer to understand. If there was a way to make the terminology more accessible to the end user, the set up could be easier. They should translate the technical jargon to an easily relatable and understandable conversation for the end user, the customer, that would be brilliant. Particularly in an environment where the IT structure is audited regularly, there's always pressure from the auditor to up the standards and up the security and you get your USCERT's that come out and there's a warning about this and the customer will want to lock out so much and when you apply it they run into issue where they can't search the internet or print to their remote office. Of course they can't print to your remote office, they just locked it up. They should make the language more understandable for the customer. If there's a product out there that made the jargon understandable to John Q. Public, I would buy that."
"​It needs to improve its ISP load balancing.​"
"It's my understanding that more of the current generation features could be brought in. There could be more integration with EDRs, for example."
"Some configuration elements cannot be easily altered once created."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."
"Cisco products are generally recognized for their performance and quality, which may justify the higher price point compared to other options on the market."
"Its licensing is on a yearly basis. It can be for three, five, or ten years. I'm happy with the pricing. You basically pay for what you get. It is that simple. When you look at Ubiquiti or Aruba, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN far outweighs what you get. If you're in the UK, Ubiquiti gives a three-year or five-year warranty, whereas here in the UAE, they only give a one-year warranty, which is no good to me. Who buys a piece of equipment with only one year warranty on it? It doesn't make sense."
"This solution is reasonably priced."
"The cost is not so much for Wireless LAN, but when you have to get the security license, it costs a lot."
"This solution is quite costly and there are costs in addition to the licensing fees."
"The solution could improve the licensing structure and the price is expensive."
"Its price is higher than other products. It is above the expectation of customers. So, every time we need to fight for a good price."
"The license is yearly. We pay for the top end. It's called 360."
"If you purchase a one-year subscription with the hardware and then you want to renew for the second year, it is very costly."
"Fortinet FortiGate gives you most of the features in one license."
"We have the full license that included all of the features and support."
"The pricing is very reasonable."
"Its price is affordable and lesser than Cisco. Cisco is expensive. In terms of licensing, there is only one issue. If a customer's license has expired a month ago and they do the renewal after one month, Fortinet renews the license from the start of the previous month. The activation of the product is done from the previous month, not from the date of renewal. The customers usually shout and complain that because they are paying today, the renewal should start from today. The support contract renewals or licensing should be renewed from the date of renewal, but Fortinet starts from the day it had expired. It is a loss for customers. They might have had some problems because of which they did not take the license one month before. Fortinet should work on this. Cisco doesn't do this. Cisco always starts from the day they apply for the license."
"I give the pricing a nine out of ten."
"Fortinet FortiGate's price can be reduced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless LAN solutions are best for your needs.
839,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user216600 - PeerSpot reviewer
Jan 3, 2016
Sophos UTM vs. Fortinet FortiGate
I have used both Sophos and Fortinet products in production and I have found the Sophos UTM appliances (hardware and virtual) to be a better fit most of the time -- with a few caveats which I will touch on below. In both instances, the transition from TMG will be mostly straightforward. The main…
 

Answers from the Community

GW
Apr 3, 2023
Apr 3, 2023
Meraki MX series are all cloud-based management with on-premises physical firewall connectivity, so if the Internet goes down you will lose the management options to the firewall. Whereas FortiGate Firewall doesn't need Internet for the first time setup. Also, it is easy to manage the management interface being it is available to local users when the case of internet connection fails. All other...
See 2 answers
MURALI NIDAMANURI - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 3, 2023
Meraki MX series are all cloud-based management with on-premises physical firewall connectivity, so if the Internet goes down you will lose the management options to the firewall. Whereas FortiGate Firewall doesn't need Internet for the first time setup. Also, it is easy to manage the management interface being it is available to local users when the case of internet connection fails. All other security features, policy creation, and VPN related remains the same as you see in any brand firewall.
Aymen FHOULA - PeerSpot reviewer
Apr 3, 2023
The Cisco Meraki MX67 and FortiGate 60 are both firewall devices, but there are some differences between them: Deployment: The Cisco Meraki MX67 is a cloud-managed firewall, meaning that it can be managed and configured through the cloud, whereas the FortiGate 60 is typically deployed as an on-premises appliance. Security features: Both devices offer a range of security features, such as firewalling, VPN, and intrusion prevention, but they may differ in the specific features and capabilities they offer. For example, FortiGate 60 offers advanced threat protection, while the Cisco Meraki MX67 offers content filtering. Throughput: The FortiGate 60 offers higher throughput than the Cisco Meraki MX67. The FortiGate 60 can handle up to 1 Gbps of traffic, while the Cisco Meraki MX67 can handle up to 450 Mbps.  The cost of the devices may also differ. The Cisco Meraki MX67 tends to be more expensive than the FortiGate 60. Scalability: The Cisco Meraki MX67 is designed for small to medium-sized businesses, while the FortiGate 60 can scale to meet the needs of larger organizations.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
7%
Financial Services Firm
6%
Educational Organization
22%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What are pros and cons of Aruba 515 Series AP vs. Cisco Meraki or Extreme Networks?
Depends. I have personally used both Cisco and Aruba so I am familiar with them. Extreme I am not, so unless they have some feature that I need or want, I wouldn't consider them. Do you have expe...
Which is better - Cisco Wireless or Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN?
Cisco Wireless is very robust, very rugged, and can handle indoor and outdoor coverage extremely well. We found it to be very reliable and to consistently run very efficiently. Cisco Wireless helpe...
How does Ruckus Wireless compare to Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN?
Cisco’s Meraki Virtual MX is a virtual instance of the Meraki SD-WAN appliance. We liked the Meraki. The Wifi APs are a great feature. The dashboard is a simple interface and easy to learn. It feat...
Which is the better NGFW: Fortinet Fortigate or Cisco Firepower?
When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and usage at large. In my opinion, Fortinet would be the best option and l use Fortinet too...
What is the biggest difference between Sophos XG and FortiGate?
From my experience regarding both the Sophos and FortiGate firewalls, I personally would rather use FortiGate. I know the firewalls change every 5 to 7 years as stated but you really do need to upg...
What are the biggest technical differences between Sophos UTM and Fortinet FortiGate?
As a solution, Sophos UTM offers a lot of functionality, it scales well, and the stability and performance are quite good. The most valuable features for me are their web and email filtering. I wou...
 

Also Known As

MR18, MR26, MR32, MR34, MR66, MR72, Meraki Wireless LAN, Meraki WLAN
FortiGate 60b, FortiGate 60c, FortiGate 80c, FortiGate 50b, FortiGate 200b, FortiGate 110c, FortiGate, Fortinet Firewall
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Advanced Medical Transport, Banco de Guayaquil, Baylor Scott & White Health, BH Telecom, Bowling Green State University, Calligaris, Children's Hospital Colorado, City of Biel, Del Papa Distributing, Department of Justice, Dimension Data, Dualtec Cloud Builders, Electricity Authority of Cyprus, Grupo Industrial Saltillo (GIS), Hertz, K&L Gates , LightEdge, Lone Star College System, Management Science Associates, Mindtree, NBC Olympics, Quest, Sony Corporation, The Department of Education in Western Australia, Valley Proteins
Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, IBM, Cisco, Dell, HP, Oracle, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Vodafone, Orange, BT Group, Telstra, Deutsche Telekom, Comcast, Time Warner Cable, CenturyLink, NTT Communications, Tata Communications, SoftBank, China Mobile, Singtel, Telus, Rogers Communications, Bell Canada, Telkom Indonesia, Telkom South Africa, Telmex, Telia Company, Telkom Kenya
Find out what your peers are saying about Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Ruckus, Cisco and others in Wireless LAN. Updated: February 2025.
839,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.