Cisco Secure Firewall vs Netgate pfSense comparison

Cisco and Netgate are both solutions in the Firewalls category. Cisco is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.2, while Netgate is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.7. Cisco holds a 5.8% mindshare in Firewalls, compared to Netgate’s 14.4% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of Netgate users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

Cisco Secure Firewall and Netgate pfSense are competing network security solutions in the firewall category. Cisco Secure Firewall seems to have the upper hand in enterprise-grade security features, while Netgate pfSense is highlighted for its flexibility and cost-effectiveness, appealing more to budget-conscious buyers.

Features: Cisco Secure Firewall provides advanced threat defense, deep network visibility, and comprehensive control across all network traffic. Netgate pfSense offers strong VPN capabilities, packet filtering, and is highly configurable with extensive customization options. The distinguishing factor is Cisco's emphasis on top-tier security and Netgate's focus on flexibility.

Room for Improvement: Cisco Secure Firewall could improve by offering more customization options, reducing complexity for smaller organizations, and potentially lowering licensing costs. Netgate pfSense might benefit from enhanced enterprise-grade support, a more intuitive user interface, and stronger threat detection features to align more closely with larger competitors.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cisco Secure Firewall features a detailed deployment model with substantial customer support, including training resources ideal for firms with complex security needs. Netgate pfSense, on the other hand, provides a straightforward deployment model driven by community support, which may benefit technically proficient teams.

Pricing and ROI: Cisco Secure Firewall involves higher initial expenses but often delivers a significant ROI via improved security and advanced features, justifying the cost for larger enterprises. In contrast, Netgate pfSense offers a robust ROI for smaller businesses due to its low-cost licensing and open-source nature.

To learn more, read our detailed Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Netgate pfSense Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Netgate pfSense

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,040 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

Fortinet FortiGate

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Firewalls category, the mindshare of Fortinet FortiGate is 21.1%, up from 17.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Firewall is 5.8%, up from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Netgate pfSense is 14.4%, down from 22.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Firewalls

Featured Reviews

EhabAli

Sr. Cybersecurity Solutions Architect at BMB

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.

Read full review

Maharajan S

VSO at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees

Enhances security with precise access control but has integration challenges

Overall, I would rate the product six out of ten. Because of the support and cost, I moved away from Cisco, but otherwise, it is a good product. Recommendation depends on the requirement. If lacking a proper team and being dependent on the OEM and partner, Cisco is not suitable. However, if the team is qualified with Cisco-certified people and the requirement is a big network, it can be considered. In today's hybrid work world, having an expanded gateway is more typical than having a single one. Thus, Cisco is unlikely to be recommended for a hybrid requirement unless in-house skills align. Otherwise, depending on partners and Cisco, it can be a risk. I rate the overall solution six out of ten.

Read full review

Vincent Hamm

CIO and President at Aim High! Inc.

I appreciate the depth of what the solution can do and the simplicity of the initial setup

We do a lot of managed services and are currently trying to get people off of L2TP VPN. Apparently, we can download a mobile config file from a configured NetGate device, and we're primarily Apple. We've experimented with it on a device that's not a production device, and we can't seem to get the phase one IPSec set correctly so that the Apple config will accept it. We've tried looking at the documentation but haven't found anything. While it's not the highest priority, it is rather frustrating. We'd like to do this, and the feature is right there, but we can't get it configured. We certainly don't want to try it on a production machine because it will break the current VPN. I would like to download the Apple mobile config so that I can tell it to configure my VPN connection to do that. We have some cross-platform things. So there's also a Windows VPN. You can download a script or a PowerShell, put it on a Windows machine, and it can connect to the VPN. It would be nice if I could say I want Mac only, Windows only, or both. I wish it could configure the IPSec phase one and phase two, or at least give me solid instructions on how to configure that. It doesn't supply out-of-the-box visibility to drive decisions. You get 75 log lines, so if you're trying to troubleshoot something, you have to look at one log and then another. It integrates with SysLog systems, but our customers are not at the level where they want to pay for some third-party SysLog system. Usually, we can get things taken care of fairly quickly. I would like to have the ability to control all my devices from one place. With Ubiquiti, you can get a controller that allows you to control all of your Wi-Fi devices, switches, and routers. From one area, you can switch to that customer and see what's happening in their environment. That's not part of pfSense. I understand why it's not because pfSense is open source and community supported. That's something that someone in the community needs to pick up and run with. It's not something the pfSense can easily implement. If they could, that'd be great.

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 solution is scalable."

"Our security improved from being able to put in rules and close off unwanted traffic."

"The pricing is great and very reasonable."

"FortiGate is on the cheaper end, and it offers good value."

"What I like the most is the configuration and that it's simple, and straightforward to maintain."

"Reliability is the best feature. We faced some issues when we were setting it up, but the service, portal, and administration are good."

"The main reason why I purchased the particular unit was that it had good reviews and what other people were saying as far as its completeness and its leading capabilities in terms of endpoint security was very good."

"The security on offer is very good."

More Fortinet FortiGate pros

"The most valuable feature is the access control list (ACL)."

"Cisco tech is always good and helpful. I would rate them as 10 out of 10."

"Sourcefire has been a great addition. The visibility and control have been nice."

"Stability is perfect. I haven't had any problems."

"Since the product is stable, we do not have to spend additional money to buy other firewalls. Once deployed, we can use the product for a long time. Thus, it is cost effective."

"We use the solution for deep packet inspection, Internet Edge functionality, IDS, and IDP."

"The features I have found most valuable are the ASA firewalls. I like to have features like most integrated systems in ACI."

"It has definitely improved our organization. It gives us remote connectivity, helps workers connect remotely, and also gives us good connectivity to our other branches."

More Cisco Secure Firewall pros

"It is a stable solution. It is also easy to install and can be deployed and maintained by one team member."

"pfSense is a nice product, and I find that there's a lot of information out there. There are some good tutorials on YouTube and other websites with helpful information."

"Open source and support are valuable. I have community support."

"The stability has been great. We've rarely had any issues that have caused a failover. When we do, the failover has made it. I don't think we've experienced any real impact from it that caused any product issues."

"Easy to deploy and easy to use."

"The scalability is very good, where you can do an HA configuration and then bring in another box, if necessary."

"If you have full logging turned on you can get a pretty good idea of what kind of traffic is going in from where to where."

"The solution provides visibility that enables data-driven decisions."

More Netgate pfSense pros

Cons

"The UI could be improved."

"They need to improve their technical support."

"The main aspect of FortiGate that could be improved is load balancing. Our management team does not want to buy another appliance for only load balancing."

"The command line is complicated, and the interface could be better."

"The support costs and licensing are sometimes so expensive."

"I have to say that the initial setup was complex. The deployment took a few days to get set up. Initially, we were using an IPVanish. We switched to this tool since we thought it would be easier. But it turns out it wasn't easier to set up and run."

"Technical support is good but the response time could be faster."

"Fortinet FortiGate is a stable solution. However, my issue is the performance only. When I use all the profiles, this affects the performance. From the beginning, I should have had a better sizing of the box."

More Fortinet FortiGate cons

"The price and SD-WAN capabilities are the areas that need improvement."

"These firewalls are not for beginners."

"Lacks a good graphical user interface."

"We have encountered problems when implementing new signatures and new versions on our firewall. Sometimes, there is a short outage of our services, and we have not been able to understand what's going on. This is an area for improvement, and it would be good to have a way to monitor and understand why there is an outage."

"It's not unexpected, but it's a common scenario where customers request dual layers of security. For instance, when dealing with regulatory compliance, especially in financial sectors regulated by entities like the Central Bank, having two distinct units is often mandated. If a client predominantly uses a solution like Palo Alto, they may need to incorporate another vendor such as Cisco or Forti. Importantly, there's a significant disparity in interfaces and management platforms between these vendors, necessitating careful consideration when integrating them into the overall security architecture"

"Most users do not have awareness of this product's functionality and features. Cisco should do something to make them aware of them. That would be quite excellent and useful to organizations that are still using legacy data-center-security products."

"They need a user-friendly interface that we could easily configure."

"In Firepower, there is an ability to search and dig into a search, which is nice. However, I'm not a super fan of the way it scrolls. If you want to look at something live, it's a lot different. You're almost waiting. With the ASDM, where it just flows, you can really see it. The second someone clicks something or does something, you'll see it. The refresh rate on the events in Firepower is not as smooth."

More Cisco Secure Firewall cons

"Ultimately, we'd like something stronger, and something that can handle threats better in real-time."

"As an open-source solution, there are so many loopholes happening within the product. By design, no one is taking ownership of it, and that is worrisome to me."

"They could do better with their licensing in the home use space. For me, that has been a struggle."

"My only suggestion is that Netgate pfSense implement more graphical monitoring. While there are accounts with add-ons for graphical monitoring of data networking, IPS, IDS, and firewall-level events, having more graphical representations like blocks would make the tool more capable. Although it has commercial support and a good GUI, it can still be challenging for someone without firewalls, command lines, and networking knowledge."

"pfSense has some limitations in detecting site sessions. We want to control internet usage based on sites and their content, and pfSense doesn't perform this function."

"I don't think pfSense's web filtering solution is the best, so I don't use it for that purpose. They could add a little better web filtering solution to pfSense. They have solutions in place, like SquidGuard, but they aren't very good."

"I've never tried it in large environments. All my clients are small businesses with a handful of employees, so I am not sure how it works in large environments. I keep up with recent versions, and there's nothing I'm waiting for, and nothing breaks when I get a new version."

"Could be simplified for new users."

More Netgate pfSense cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It has a competitive price."

"Its pricing is good. It's average or normal as compared to Palo Alto and Check Point firewalls."

"The price depends on the size of the company. From the beginning, you just want to know the internet bandwidths, speed, and the number of users to be able to offer the right product and model. They have a lot of products in FortiGate according to the size of the company, like 200D and 300D."

"Their licensing costs are annual. The UTM feature license along with their support is called FortiCare. We include that as a part of the annual maintenance cost. Palo Alto or Juniper also have an annual subscription charge for UTM. Price, of course, can always be more competitive, but it is not the most expensive product. The price-performance ratio is quite high for FortiGate."

"I would rate the pricing a five out of ten"

"Fortinet Secure SD-WAN delivered the lowest total cost of ownership (TCO) per Mbps among all other vendors."

"It is quite affordable for our customers. There is a separate cost for IPS, antivirus, web filtering, and other features. They have a great choice of licenses. You can go for the license that you want, which is quite useful."

"They are very competitive, but we like to have the factory warranty taken care of."

More Fortinet FortiGate pricing and cost advice

"We looking for a possible new solution because of the licensing and VPN."

"Our subscription costs, just for the firewalls, is between $400,000 and $500,000 a year."

"The program is very expensive."

"Licensing is not only for Secure Firewalls, and it's too complicated."

"Licensing is expensive compared to other solutions."

"The licensing package is good, but the licensing fee should be decreased."

"The solution was chosen because of its price compared to other similar solutions."

"The pricing could always be cheaper."

More Cisco Secure Firewall pricing and cost advice

"I am using the free version of pfSense."

"While pfSense hardware from Netgate might have a higher upfront cost, I've had very little trouble with it. Plus, buying from them directly helps fund the software's development, making it a worthwhile investment in my eyes."

"All costs are low compared to other solutions. The hardware is stable and cheap."

"Netgate pfSense is a cost-effective option. If you're not using VPN, you can acquire a decent embedded PC for around a hundred dollars and install pfSense on it, effectively creating a robust firewall solution. With this setup, you can achieve a throughput of two hundred to three hundred megabits per second (Mbps) without any issues, provided you're handling relatively simple rules. The level of performance depends on the specific requirements and tasks."

"The price of pfSense is on par with everything else. It depends on how big an appliance you buy and whether you're purchasing it directly from Netgate. Some rack-mounted systems are expensive—a couple thousand bucks. The one that I use at my house was $700."

"I prefer the software licensing model."

"The licensing model needs improvement, especially for home users. There should be more flexibility to change licenses with hardware changes. The pricing model could be more accessible for home users."

"It is an open-source solution."

More Netgate pfSense pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparison Review

it_user206346

Security Consultant at Webernetz.net - Network Security Consulting

Mar 11, 2015

Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto Networks

Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto: Management Goodies You often have comparisons of both firewalls concerning security components. Of course, a firewall must block attacks, scan for viruses, build VPNs, etc. However, in this post I am discussing the advantages and disadvantages from both vendors concerning…

Read full review

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Educational Organization

22%

Computer Software Company

14%

Comms Service Provider

Manufacturing Company

Educational Organization

42%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Computer Software Company

15%

Comms Service Provider

11%

Educational Organization

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

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 a...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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 ...

See all answers

Which is better - Fortinet FortiGate or Cisco ASA Firewall?

One of our favorite things about Fortinet Fortigate is that you can deploy on the cloud or on premises. Fortinet Fort...

See all answers

How does Cisco's ASA firewall compare with the Firepower NGFW?

It is easy to integrate Cisco ASA with other Cisco products and also other NAC solutions. When you understand the Cis...

See all answers

Which is better - Meraki MX or Cisco ASA Firewall?

Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) software is the operating software for the Cisco ASA suite. It supports netw...

See all answers

Help me find the best open source router

You don't really specify what type of router you are looking for but if you are talking about a gateway router I reco...

See all answers

How do I choose between Fortinet FortiGate and pfSense?

Fortinet’s Fortigate is a firewall solution we use and are very much satisfied with its performance. We find Fortigat...

See all answers

What is the difference between PfSense and OPNsense?

Two of the most common and well recognized firewalls, PfSense and OPNsense both support site-to-site IPsec VPN and cl...

See all answers

Comparisons

Sophos XG vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 23% of the time

WatchGuard Firebox vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 5% of the time

SonicWall TZ vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 5% of the time

Meraki MX vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 5% of the time

OPNsense vs Fortinet FortiGate

Compared 3% of the time

More Fortinet FortiGate Competitors

Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs Cisco Secure Firewall

Compared 8% of the time

Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls vs Cisco Secure Firewall

Compared 5% of the time

OPNsense vs Cisco Secure Firewall

Compared 4% of the time

Meraki MX vs Cisco Secure Firewall

Compared 4% of the time

Sophos XG vs Cisco Secure Firewall

Compared 3% of the time

More Cisco Secure Firewall Competitors

OPNsense vs Netgate pfSense

Compared 34% of the time

Sophos XG vs Netgate pfSense

Compared 9% of the time

KerioControl vs Netgate pfSense

Compared 4% of the time

Sophos UTM vs Netgate pfSense

Compared 2% of the time

Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls vs Netgate pfSense

Compared 2% of the time

More Netgate pfSense Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Fortinet FortiGate

March 2025

Download Fortinet FortiGate product report

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Firewall

March 2025

Download Cisco Secure Firewall product report

Buyer's Guide

Netgate pfSense

March 2025

Download Netgate pfSense product report

Also Known As

FortiGate 60b, FortiGate 60c, FortiGate 80c, FortiGate 50b, FortiGate 200b, FortiGate 110c, FortiGate, Fortinet Firewall

Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Adaptive Security Appliance, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAv, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall

No data available

Overview

Fortinet FortiGate offers comprehensive network security and firewall protection across multiple locations. It effectively manages data traffic and secures environments with features like VPN, intrusion prevention, and UTM controls.

Organizations rely on Fortinet FortiGate for its robust integration with advanced security policies, ensuring significant protection for enterprises, cloud environments, and educational sectors. It facilitates network segmentation, application-level security, and authentication management, securing communication within and between locations such as branches and data centers. Its efficient SD-WAN and UTM features enable streamlined data management and enhanced threat protection capabilities. Users appreciate its centralized management, facilitating seamless operations across diverse environments.

What are the key features of Fortinet FortiGate?

VPN Capabilities: Ensure secure remote access for users and seamless site-to-site connections.
Intrusion Prevention System (IPS): Detect and prevent security threats and vulnerabilities.
Advanced Firewall: Offers robust firewalling with application control and web filtering.
SD-WAN: Optimizes application performance and enhances bandwidth management.
SSL VPN: Provides reliable and secure access for remote workers.

What benefits should users expect from Fortinet FortiGate?

High-performance Security: Delivers effective threat mitigation with high availability.
Centralized Management: Simplifies network operations with cloud-based management tools.
Detailed Analytics: Provides comprehensive insights into network activity and security threats.
Load Balancing: Ensures optimal resource distribution and traffic management.

Fortinet FortiGate is crucial in sectors like education, offering robust networks for secure data flow between campuses and facilitating remote learning. In enterprise environments, it allows efficient management of application traffic and security across multiple branches, while in the cloud, it seamlessly integrates with diverse platforms to enhance security infrastructure.

Fortinet

Cisco Secure Firewall stands as a robust and adaptable security solution, catering to organizations of all sizes. It's designed to shield networks from a diverse array of cyber threats, such as ransomware, malware, and phishing attacks. Beyond mere protection, it also offers secure access to corporate resources, beneficial for employees, partners, and customers alike. One of its key functions includes network segmentation, which serves to isolate critical assets and minimize the risk of lateral movement within the network.

The core features of Cisco Secure Firewall are multifaceted:

Advanced threat protection is achieved through a combination of intrusion prevention, malware detection, and URL filtering technologies.
For secure access, the firewall presents multiple options, including VPN, remote access, and single sign-on.
Its network segmentation capability is vital in creating barriers within the network to safeguard critical assets.
The firewall is scalable, effectively serving small businesses to large enterprises.
Management is streamlined through Cisco DNA Center, a central management system.

The benefits of deploying Cisco Secure Firewall are substantial. It significantly reduces the risk of cyberattacks, thereby enhancing the security posture of an organization. This security also translates into increased productivity, as secure access means uninterrupted work. Compliance with industry regulations is another advantage, as secure access and network segmentation align with many regulatory standards. Additionally, it helps in reducing IT costs by automating security tasks and simplifying management processes.

In practical scenarios, Cisco Secure Firewall finds diverse applications. It's instrumental in protecting branch offices from cyberattacks, securing remote access for various stakeholders, safeguarding cloud workloads, and segmenting networks to isolate sensitive areas.

User reviews from PeerSpot reflect an overall positive experience with the Cisco Secure Firewall. Users appreciate its ease of configuration, good management capabilities, robust protection, user-friendly interface, and scalability. However, some areas for improvement include better integration capabilities with other vendors, maturity, control over bandwidth for end-users, and addressing software bugs.

In summary, Cisco Secure Firewall is a comprehensive, versatile, and reliable security solution that effectively meets the security needs of various organizations. It offers a balance of advanced protection, user-friendly management, and scalability, making it a valuable asset in the realm of network security.

Cisco

Netgate pfSense is widely leveraged by organizations for its comprehensive capabilities in firewalls, VPN servers, and bandwidth management. It suits LAN, WAN, and DMZ networks, offering secure, scalable, and efficient networking solutions.

Netgate pfSense stands out in diverse environments with its enterprise-grade features and cost-effective operations compared to competitors like Cisco. Deployed as an edge device, it optimizes routing, ad-blocking, content filtering, and traffic shaping. Users benefit from its versatile configurations, robust firewall protection, VPN functionality, and ISP load balancing. The open-source nature allows for extensive customization, integrating plugins like Snort and pfBlockerNG, and compatibility with third-party tools enhances its utility. The intuitive GUI combined with detailed logging and centralized management fortifies network security.

What features define Netgate pfSense?

Firewall: Provides robust network security through advanced filtering and stateful packet inspections.
VPN: Ensures secure remote access with high-performing VPN capabilities.
Load Balancing: Efficiently distributes traffic across multiple ISPs, ensuring uptime and performance.
Customization: Supports various plugins for enhanced functionality, tailor-made to specific needs.
Scalability: Adapts easily to varying network demands, providing high availability and flexibility.

What benefits should be considered for ROI?

Cost-Effectiveness: Delivers premium features at a fraction of the cost of traditional network appliances.
Flexibility: Offers a customizable solution that integrates well with existing infrastructure.
Community Support: Backed by a strong user community offering insights and troubleshooting resources.
Security: Supports VLAN segmentation, enhancing protection and management of network traffic.

Organizations in industries such as finance, healthcare, and education find Netgate pfSense integral due to its advanced security features and cost benefits. Its scalable architecture and strong VPN support are crucial for industries requiring stringent data protection and reliable remote access. The adaptability of pfSense makes it suitable for dynamic environments seeking comprehensive, secure networking solutions.

Netgate

Sample Customers

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

There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.

Nerds On Site Inc., RKC Development Inc., Expertech, Fisher's Technology, Ncisive, Consulting, CPURX, Vaughn's Computer House Calls, Imeretech LLC, Digital Crisis, Carolina Digital Phone, Technigogo Technology Services, The Simple Solution, SwiftecITInc, Rocky Mountain Tech Team, Free Range Geeks, Alaska Computer Geeks, Lark Information Technology, Renaissance Systems Inc., Cutting Edge Computers, Caretech LLC, GoVanguard, Network Touch Ltd, P.C. Solutions.Net, Vision Voice and Data Systems LLC, Montgomery Technologies, Techforce, Concero Networks, ASONInc, CPS Electronics and Consulting, Darkwire.net LLC, IT Specialists, MBS-Net Inc., VOICE1 LLC, Advantage Networking Inc., Powerhouse Systems, Doxa Multimedia Inc., Pro Computer Service, Virtual IT Services, A&J Computers Inc., Envision IT LLC, CommunicaONE Inc., Bone Computer Inc., Amax Engineering Corporation, QPG Ltd. Co., IT 101 Inc., Perfect Cloud Solutions, Applied Technology Group Inc., The Digital Sun Group LLC, Firespring

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Netgate pfSense

March 2025

Free Report: Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Netgate pfSense

Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Netgate pfSense and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Cisco Secure Firewall vs. Netgate pfSense 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.