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

Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) vs Cisco Secure Firewall comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.1
Cisco Secure Client offers seamless, user-friendly connectivity, simplifying remote work despite unclear direct ROI.
Sentiment score
7.2
Cisco Secure Firewall offers improved security and efficiency, but cost and ROI vary based on deployment and usage.
The biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Firewall is that there's no waste in any infrastructure cost and licensing costs for us.
From my point of view, the biggest return on investment when using Cisco Secure Firewall is the single pane of glass, which is a huge plus for us.
The biggest return on investment for me when using Cisco Secure Firewall is reliability and robust network design.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.7
Users find Cisco support knowledgeable and effective, despite occasional access difficulties, relying often on internal IT for Secure Client.
Sentiment score
7.5
Cisco Secure Firewall support is highly rated for knowledgeable assistance, though response times and access vary based on contracts.
Cisco offers very high-quality customer service.
Cisco technical support is difficult, and it requires lots of contracts.
Over the years, there's been a decline in the quality, mainly in areas such as the experience level of support engineers and the time taken to address and escalate issues.
I have to provide many logs, yet problems remain unresolved, often requiring workarounds rather than solutions.
I have been working with them on firewalls, wireless, switching, and routing, and the support is the best.
They have expertise and provide solutions for the most difficult problems.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
Cisco Secure Client is scalable and effective for thousands of users, with flexible licensing for diverse environments and remote work.
Sentiment score
7.2
Cisco Secure Firewall offers scalability and integration, though licensing complexity and scalability challenges in growth may concern some users.
A smaller firewall can handle fewer sessions, while a larger one can handle tens of thousands of sessions.
The scalability of Cisco Secure Client depends on the hardware I choose.
Regarding scalability, Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) rates as excellent because we can scale out by simply buying more licenses from the vendor.
Scalability presents a challenge.
Compared to FortiGate and Palo Alto, it lags in configuration and other aspects.
Even with the highest one, the 4600, we still face issues, particularly when transitioning between screens; it becomes very slow.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
Cisco Secure Client is highly stable and reliable, with user satisfaction and minimal technical issues reported, scoring 8-10 regularly.
Sentiment score
7.2
Cisco Secure Firewall is highly reliable with minimal outages, though occasional upgrade issues are typically fixed with updates.
I would rate the stability ten out of ten.
The stability is really good, and I would rate it up to nine.
Regarding the performance of Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect), I have not seen any issues because performance-wise it functions properly.
We have often encountered split-brain scenarios during failover processes and code upgrades, which have been persistent problems for us.
We work with a cluster with high availability, so if something goes wrong, we have it functioning.
Cisco Secure Firewall offers exceptional performance and stability.
 

Room For Improvement

Users desire improvements in Cisco Secure Client's interface, ease of use, connectivity, security, updates, and integration with systems.
Cisco Secure Firewall faces criticism for its complex GUI, high costs, and demands better features, integration, and performance improvements.
I am using Intune for deployments, and it's not easy to create an automated deployment where users do not need to register server addresses.
Vendors offer more features, such as a kill switch.
Cisco's security portfolio, including Secure Client and the firewalls, is falling behind.
My ongoing complaint for the last six years has been the lack of CLI functionality, which hinders my ability to work on the firewall, alongside concerns regarding deployment time.
Firepower Management Center is quite out of date compared to other vendors.
The integration between Cisco products themselves presents difficulties, such as SD-WAN configuration.
 

Setup Cost

Cisco Secure Client pricing is reasonable with term-based licensing, but some users find it costly compared to free competitors.
Cisco Secure Firewall is costly but offers robust support and reliability; licensing complexity can be mitigated by smart licensing.
Palo Alto and Fortinet provide free VPN connections, but Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) requires a license purchase.
I perceive the pricing to be a seven, however, I have perpetual licenses.
The pricing seems to align equally with other competitors like Palo Alto during a competitive situation.
It's good to have them, however, it costs us a lot.
It's considered a premium, but people pay that price for Cisco.
There are a lot of in-place contracts for us that provide the benefit of discounts.
 

Valuable Features

Cisco Secure Client provides seamless, secure VPN access with user-friendly setup, cross-platform support, and integration with enterprise software.
Cisco Secure Firewall provides robust security, scalability, and central management, with intuitive tools for efficient threat protection and network monitoring.
Beneficial for businesses needing secure access outside the office.
Additionally, it gives the user flexibility of working from anywhere, which is a major feature we are looking at.
Cisco Secure Client's AnyConnect VPN's reliability has been absolutely wonderful, as well as the ability to connect from any network, regardless of location.
What stands out positively about Cisco is their training and support, which has effectively prepared engineers to work with their products.
This is very important to my organization, as we work extensively with security because we are a bank, so we can keep the data safe.
Cisco Secure Firewall allows me to safeguard Layer 7 or Layer 3 and manage the security rules with the business needs of my organization.
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Secure Client (includ...
Ranking in Cisco Security Portfolio
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
77
Ranking in other categories
SSL VPN (1st), Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (3rd), ZTNA as a Service (9th)
Cisco Secure Firewall
Ranking in Cisco Security Portfolio
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
428
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Cisco Security Portfolio category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) is 11.3%, up from 9.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Secure Firewall is 6.8%, up from 5.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cisco Security Portfolio
 

Featured Reviews

Wouter Beer - PeerSpot reviewer
Generates revenue through service offering while needing additional safety features
The primary use case for Cisco Secure Client, including AnyConnect, is as a VPN for remote access I use AnyConnect because I have Cisco infrastructure. It utilizes certificates, which allows for automatic setup. The security features are beneficial, and the whole idea of the app is that it should…
Phil Shiflett - PeerSpot reviewer
Unified policies streamline network management but complex licensing requires attention
Cisco Secure Firewall has some growth opportunities in terms of visibility and control capabilities regarding managing encrypted traffic. It has the ability to analyze encrypted traffic, and there is potential for more integration with APIs and AI to enhance these capabilities. Cisco Secure Firewall needs improvement in deployment time and the capability to access the CLI during support calls. I often encounter issues when technical support uses a CLI that is not familiar to me while troubleshooting through the GUI. My ongoing complaint for the last six years has been the lack of CLI functionality, which hinders my ability to work on the firewall, alongside concerns regarding deployment time. For the next release, they should look at the features offered by competitors such as Fortinet, including the ability to perform packet capture directly from the interface. If they enhanced their troubleshooting efficiency related to packet capture for each specific rule, it would simplify the process significantly.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cisco Security Portfolio solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user206346 - PeerSpot reviewer
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…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
29%
Educational Organization
17%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
6%
Educational Organization
31%
Computer Software Company
16%
University
6%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client?
The tool is user-friendly, robust and easy to use in any environment.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client?
Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) is somewhat expensive compared to others such as Fortinet or Palo Alto, which provide free VPN when the firewall is purchased. Palo Alto and Fortinet prov...
What needs improvement with Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client?
Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) is sufficient now after the update to version five or later, and I believe there's nothing to improve. I would prefer the cost to be reduced by about 20% ...
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...
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 Fortigate is very stable, reliable, and consistent. We like that we can manage the e...
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 Cisco ecosystem, it is very simple to handle. This solution has traffic inspection ...
 

Also Known As

Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client
Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Firewall, Cisco ASA NGFW, Adaptive Security Appliance, Cisco Sourcefire Firewalls, Cisco ASAv, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

MST, Molina Healthcare, Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers, Arup, New South Wales Rural FireService
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.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Client (including AnyConnect) vs. Cisco Secure Firewall and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.