Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi comparison

Cisco and WatchGuard are both solutions in the Wireless LAN category. Cisco is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.8, while WatchGuard is ranked #23 with an average rating of 7.0. Cisco holds a 10.3% mindshare in Wireless LAN, compared to WatchGuard’s 0.9% mindshare. Additionally, 92% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of WatchGuard users who would recommend it.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN

Read 122 Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN reviews

10,406 Views
9,261 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

Read 7 WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi reviews

616 Views
598 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN

WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and WatchGuard Secure Wi-Fi are competitors in the wireless networking market. Cisco Meraki excels in ease of deployment and user support, while WatchGuard is preferred for its robust security features and pricing structure.

Features: Cisco Meraki offers seamless cloud management, scalability, and advanced security tools such as traffic analysis and application management. WatchGuard emphasizes security with advanced threat protection and secure guest access via its Total Wi-Fi package.

Room for Improvement: Cisco Meraki could improve by enhancing its security capabilities and reducing its initial cost. It would also benefit from expanding on-premise setup options. WatchGuard, on the other hand, can improve by simplifying its cloud management interface and providing more intuitive setup processes. Additionally, it can benefit from offering more comprehensive support options.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cisco Meraki is known for its user-friendly cloud-based management system that simplifies deployment and offers extensive support. While WatchGuard offers straightforward deployment, its on-premise setup may require more expertise, yet it makes up for it with responsive customer support and detailed documentation.

Pricing and ROI: Cisco Meraki requires a higher initial investment, justified by its extensive features and support. In contrast, WatchGuard Secure Wi-Fi offers a more cost-effective initial setup and promises significant ROI through its advanced security features, appealing to those prioritizing cost and security.

To learn more, read our detailed Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 882,813 peers since 2012

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

Ranking in Wireless LAN

3rd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

4.4

Number of Reviews

122

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

Ranking in Wireless LAN

23rd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Wireless LAN category, the mindshare of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is 10.3%, down from 13.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi is 0.9%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Wireless LAN Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN	10.3%
WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi	0.9%
Other	88.8%

Wireless LAN

Featured Reviews

DolfKrikke

Senior Network Architect at Previder

Centralized management has simplified remote branch control and improved network visibility

Cisco Meraki Wireless is very powerful and very easy to manage. The solution is also integrating Cisco Catalyst Wireless products into their portfolio, and they are managing the Catalyst switches as well. The seamless roaming capabilities function well. I monitor network performance with Meraki's real-time analytics. The most useful metrics to my team are the internet performance metrics, as there is a lot of information in the dashboard that I can access. All auditing and event logs are centralized in the dashboard. When I need to apply to compliance requirements or other regulatory needs, I can have my auditing in one place, which is an advantage. I use Cisco Meraki Wireless's Layer 7 application traffic shaping with the MX and the Meraki MX Firewalls.

Read full review

reviewer2562924

IT System Support Administrator at a non-profit with 501-1,000 employees

Configuration offers flexibility but response to incidents needs improvement

We recommend using WatchGuard Secure Wi-Fi, but when incidents occur, it can be very difficult to identify why they happen. Normally, the issues are simple to fix, but we recently faced a major incident. We are still trying to identify the cause, which is why I would rate it seven out of ten. Without this incident, I might have rated it eight to nine. Overall, I give the solution a rating of seven.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable features are the management tools, including monitoring and reporting."

"It has good security with its Layer 7 protections."

"Meraki is a decent solution for a small company, and we use it in a pretty typical way. We need Teams and Zoom to work, and we need a high level of security because we want our business to remain confidential."

"Integrating with the router, firewall, and Wireless Controller is advantageous."

"Its ease of use and flexibility are most valuable. It is cloud-based software."

"The settings of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN can be very granular. You can lock down and block devices with the controls. For example, we have four different wireless settings, such as guest, employee, security, and backup. For example, the settings for the employees, if they use laptops, they're required to have certain settings, such as an antivirus installed. If they do not then Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN will not let them connect. This is very good protection because the network works on the bringing your own device(BYOD) principle. It's a BYOD environment now, and you also don't want them to bring infection into the environment because these people are connecting to the LAN via wireless connections. We have to be careful because we're managing it, we have to be very strict with regards to the rules and policies."

"The product's cloud controller is easy to use."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the application visibility, which is one of the main features."

More Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN pros

"We like that WatchGuard works and integrates directly with the firewalls we use."

"The Wi-Fi security features of this solution have been great for our customers who need to strictly control access to their network."

"Cloud analytics that provide all its attributes."

"The solution has been stable."

"It makes it easy to obtain all information about the client experience."

"The configuration part of WatchGuard is very flexible."

"They're very easy to set up and get running."

Cons

"Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN could improve by having more granularity in terms of the data displayed. However, I understand that with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, you need to have a compromise point to what are the functions that you're going to provide to the users versus ease of use. More granularity in terms of the data and the things that you can do to the devices would be helpful. For example, when we wanted to make a change, restriction, or segregation within Palo Alto, we can go to the level of detail that we want. The amount of detail provided is amazing, it is very granular. However, it comes with much more difficulty, it requires a technical understanding of the environment compared to Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN."

"The error logs need to be much more comprehensive."

"Meraki leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to the technical capabilities in terms of throughput, spectrum, management, higher-level functions, etc"

"We have used technical support for some issues but not many times."

"It lags a bit in providing reports for Wi-Fi performance."

"The stability could be better. We have experienced many instances where we have experienced a lag in our network, and I am not sure if it is due to their devices or our network."

"The wireless infrastructure scalability has room for improvement."

"It's performing well, really well. We don't have any issues. We only have issues if there is a lot of rogue APs in the neighborhood and that not Meraki's fault."

More Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN cons

"If a client device had issues with authentication due to out of date browser or similar difficulties, it would be nice to have the ability to migrate the client onto the portal via one click."

"Inability to import a user with one click."

"The price of this solution needs to reviewed, as it is currently high enough to deter customers from trying it."

"I don't think they're available at the best price."

"One of the things is if you buy it with a certain subscription, you can't easily change the subscription level."

"The support response can be time-consuming because sometimes issues are very sensitive and require instant attention."

"The solution can be scaled but it has limitations from my experience."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Meraki is a very good solution, but the price is quite high for small markets."

"We pay licensing fees."

"The pricing is based on a subscription and is a bit high at the moment."

"Pricing could be better."

"The solution is pretty expensive."

"This solution is quite costly and there are costs in addition to the licensing fees."

"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."

"We pay a yearly license fee for the solution."

More Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN pricing and cost advice

"Your licensing and cost, as would be required for many other solutions, being considered for eighty to two hundred and eighty different physical locations, is just about the same amount per access point."

"WatchGuard is on the upper scale for pricing."

"The solution is priced high compared to competitors. However, for the features that are included in the solution, the price becomes more reasonable."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless LAN solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Educational Organization

Computer Software Company

10%

Non Profit

Outsourcing Company

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	69
Midsize Enterprise	27
Large Enterprise	31

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	2

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi?

The support response can be time-consuming because sometimes issues are very sensitive and require instant attention. Also, when an incident occurs, the impact can be significantly huge. A recent p...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi?

We use WatchGuard Secure Wi-Fi because we have used different tools as well, like Ubiquiti. The complexity of Ubiquiti is much more compared to WatchGuard, which provides more flexibility and is ea...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi?

See all answers

Comparisons

Aruba Wireless vs Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN

Compared 34% of the time

Ruckus Wireless vs Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN

Compared 11% of the time

Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points vs Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN

Compared 9% of the time

Fortinet FortiAP vs Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN

Compared 5% of the time

Cisco Wireless vs Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN

Compared 4% of the time

More Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN Competitors

Ubiquiti WLAN vs WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

Compared 29% of the time

Fortinet FortiWLM vs WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

Compared 18% of the time

Aruba Wireless vs WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

Compared 12% of the time

Ruckus Wireless vs WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

Compared 10% of the time

Aruba Instant vs WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

Compared 7% of the time

More WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN

February 2026

Download Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN product report

Buyer's Guide

WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

January 2026

Download WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi product report

Also Known As

MR18, MR26, MR32, MR34, MR66, MR72, Meraki Wireless LAN, Meraki WLAN

No data available

Overview

Cisco Meraki access points are built from the highest grade components and carefully optimized for a seamless user experience. The outcome: faster connections, greater user capacity, more coverage, and fewer support calls. The Cisco Meraki dashboard gives visibility into the network users, their devices, and their applications. Armed with rich analytics, administrators can quickly create access control and application usage policies, optimizing both the end-user experience and network security.

Cisco

WatchGuard is a global leader in network security, secure Wi-Fi, and network intelligence products and services for SMBs and Distributed Enterprises worldwide. Our mission is to make enterprise-grade security accessible to companies of all types and sizes through simplicity, making WatchGuard an ideal solution for distributed enterprises and SMBs. WatchGuard is headquartered in Seattle, Washington, with offices throughout North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, and Latin America.

WatchGuard

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

Portsmouth Grammar School, HILOTEC

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

February 2026

Free Report: Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi report.

See our list of best Wireless LAN vendors.

We monitor all Wireless LAN 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.