Cisco Meraki MX Firewalls is a combined UTM and Software-Defined WAN solution. Meraki is managed via the cloud, and provides core firewall services, including site-to-site VPN, plus network monitoring.
$595
per appliance
WatchGuard Network Security
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
WatchGuard Network Security is a network security and firewall software. WatchGuard includes secure Wi-Fi, multi-factor authentication, and network intelligence products and services designed for SMB’s.
Cisco Meraki MX is a different product targeted at different markets, not exactly a UTM / NGFW. Centralized management and a single pane of glass add a lot of value. Again there are sites where no MX can replace a PA due to the configuration requirements and performance …
Meraki MX's have their place due to the ease of configuration, management, and cost. That is small to mid size businesses. If you require features such as the full suite of NG firewall options, SD-WAN, and granularity of ACL/Policy rules, then Fortinet, Palo Alto and/or …
WatchGuard Network Security is simpler to implement than a solution such as Cisco ASA. User-friendly interface, logical configuration. WatchGuard Network Security is less expensive than a Cisco Meraki MX solution, and allows the product to be used, albeit without additional …
Compared to the meraki that I've worked with in the past, I like that I'm not paying Cisco tax and there is a lot more functionality with WG. For me, the Sophos Hardware is not hefty enough to handle their OS because the UI is so slow. Ubiquiti doesn't even compete and …
WatchGuard provides a cost competitive product stack against all their main competitors, in many cases coming in cheaper, with a more impressive feature set. The range of models available allows you to match the right sized appliance to any office.
WatchGuard's main asset is that its cloud is fast, it distributes detected threats to its firebox before anyone else, and that is a great point in its favor, if your protection system lets users pass a threat that has just appeared, the problem is serious, and you are going to …
WatchGuard was already implemented in this environment. I would not have ever chosen them, and the only reason we've purchased more products from them is due to emergencies.
Honestly, the ease of setup and simplicity in the setup is wayyyyy better than Fortinet. Things just *work*. You don't need to get into CLI to get your site to site working. The initial setup wizard leaves you at a VERY good spot to get up and running and then season to your …
WatchGuard's Network Security firewalls offer comparable security and processing capabilities at a cost-effective price point. When comparing the packet handling on DPI, VPN, and simple packet filtering, Watchguard will usually test above the other competitors; especially when …
Watchguard is much easier to manage at a much better price point. Fortinet is very good, but complex and needs more knowledge to manage. Sonicwall is not straightforward at all to use. Meraki is too basic.
We found WatchGuard [Network Security] has a great combination of deep down controls of traffic when desired but [is] still easy to configure and maintain. We also trust their published throughput numbers compared to specialty configs needed to match published throughput with …
WatchGuard provides a much more comprehensive list of features compared to Meraki which was previously the go-to vendor. Improving network security tenfold for our clients.
WatchGuard Network Security has more features than Peplink and Meraki and ultimately makes it a better firewall than them. Sophos is very similar in feature set however WatchGuard's approach to management and visibility sets it apart.
I find that WatchGuard really shines against the competition in three areas. First, out of all the firewall appliances I have used, they are the easiest to set up and get running. Second, they perform just as well or better than comparable appliances, and third, they can't be …
It's been our experience the WatchGuard products hold up better long term and are more substantial (granular choices for setup) than the Meraki product. WatchGuard menus are, in my opinion, friendlier to use and understand. Sonicwall uses far too many screens, and having to …
Similar in security and ease of use, and while the Cisco appliances offer a more granular, customizable interface the services offered per cost may be a little out of range for smaller businesses/organizations.
We prefer Meraki's centralized cloud hosted infrastructure. This makes it much more convenient for management. It is also easier for junior techs to learn.
After using ASAs, Sonicwalls, and pfSense; and then also evaluating FortiGates I would have to say that WatchGuard as a nextGen/UTM device with all the services enabled including deep packet inspection is comparatively faster. Also, the ease of use, support, and traffic …
WatchGuard is competitive in pricing and features with all the major vendors and typically rewards existing customers through their trade up promotions; these are excellent on upgrading to newer technologies while not losing the value in the older WatchGuard devices you are …