No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Citrix Gateway vs Sangfor SSL VPN comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

Citrix Gateway
Ranking in SSL VPN
1st
Ranking in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
Universal Access Gateways (1st)
Sangfor SSL VPN
Ranking in SSL VPN
8th
Ranking in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
17th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the SSL VPN category, the mindshare of Citrix Gateway is 11.6%, down from 14.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor SSL VPN is 7.3%, up from 3.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
SSL VPN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Citrix Gateway11.6%
Sangfor SSL VPN7.3%
Other81.1%
SSL VPN
 

Featured Reviews

PEDRO FONSECA - PeerSpot reviewer
Citrix VDI & Windows Virtualization Specialist at ATOS
Modular security has protected remote access and simplifies endpoint compliance management
The most valuable feature in Citrix Gateway is the securable, modular solution. The most useful behaviors that Citrix has is that you can secure the applications and all the infrastructure in a modular way. You can segment the securization in groups, allowing you to do a lot of things. Citrix Gateway is really strong and secure for the companies to have the Endpoint Analysis feature configured. You can configure this to check what the company needs to be checked. Companies need to authorize some devices to check if antivirus can accomplish the necessities of the company. The final appliance is really secure for accessing the company's network resources. You have many ways to maintain security protocols. One way is using Citrix Gateway, and another is the Citrix policies where you can configure many things in desktops and applications published for the company.
Wajeeh Ul Hasan . - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Administrator at Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Institute of Science and Technology
A secure and user-friendly solution that is simple to implement and configure
We used Sangfor SSL VPN to access our servers from home during COVID-19 in case of emergency Sangfor SSL VPN has secured our organization, and we haven't faced any attacks. Sangfor SSL VPN is a secure and user-friendly solution. The other valuable features of the solution include web access…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The initial setup is simple. Normally with all setups, it's not very complicated. It really depends on the customer."
"We use it to consolidate remote access to provide single sign-on across all of the applications."
"Provides good performance and speed."
"Just creating that gateway to the storefront for Citrix is the most valuable aspect of the solution for us."
"It adds great security to your outfacing information."
"It's easy to use. Also, the deployment part is perfect."
"For the use cases we have, the solution is perfect."
"The solution is very stable. If I were to rate it out of ten, I would give stability a nine."
"Sangfor SSL VPN is a secure and user-friendly solution."
"Altogether, this is a very good product."
"Sangfor SSL VPN provides secure encryption for communication."
"It is a stable solution...The initial setup of the product is very easy."
"The platform is easy to use."
"Sangfor SSL VPN has a user-friendly user interface."
"The most valuable feature is our ability to limit access by user, IP address, or MAC address."
 

Cons

"The solution can be a bit pricey."
"The first level support is very poor."
"Areas that should be improved are the configuration of profiles and uploading and downloading of our certificates."
"Technical support could be improved."
"Technical support is not good."
"The tool must provide better integration and connectivity."
"At this time it costs 35% more than other solutions."
"If the solution had a more advanced DNS, it would be an improvement."
"Sangfor SSL VPN should provide advanced protection against ransomware and better data analysis."
"In redundancy mode, when the firewall goes off, the VPN should be able to connect to the secondary firewall automatically."
"The technical support team takes around two months to respond to queries. It is very time-consuming."
"I think Sangfor can provide a web-based SSL VPN version."
"The solution's integration with other firewall vendors could be improved."
"No solution is perfect, so there is room for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It costs about 4,000 a year."
"I believe the pricing is comparable to SaaS"
"There is a license to use Citrix Gateway and it is less expensive to use when compared to other solutions."
"Citrix is quite expensive."
"The price could be lower."
"There are two or three different models, but you can actually have a CapEx where you purchase the unit outright and then there's a yearly maintenance cost on top for years two and three, and four, or you can actually do a subscription purchase through Citrix cloud and you pay on a monthly basis, or you can have a three-year subscription contract as well. I give the solution a six out of ten for its cost."
"The solution has a yearly licensing fee."
"I consider Citrix Gateway to be an expensive solution, generally ranging from $5,000 to $15,000 yearly, depending on the model."
"The first 30 licenses are free, and you have to purchase the rest if required."
"My company has a three-year license for Sangfor SSL VPN."
"The product is inexpensive."
"The pricing is good and the standard license allows for 30 users."
"Sangfor SSL VPN is a cheap solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which SSL VPN solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise17
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Citrix Gateway?
The price is one aspect, but technically it is complete. Technically, it is really complete.
What needs improvement with Citrix Gateway?
I see room for improvement in several areas. The monitoring site could be much better because monitoring NetScaler and Citrix Gateway is too difficult with just SNMP traps available. Improving the ...
What is your primary use case for Citrix Gateway?
I am on the customer side using Citrix products, specifically Citrix CVAD for Virtual and Desktop virtualization. I am using Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops service. We are using Citrix Gateway an...
What needs improvement with Sangfor SSL VPN?
The solution's integration with other firewall vendors could be improved. Its interoperability matrices and different configurations with other vendor products also need improvements. Our client ha...
What is your primary use case for Sangfor SSL VPN?
We're currently exploring Sangfor SSL VPN more on the cybersecurity side.
 

Also Known As

Citrix NetScaler Unified Gateway
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aeronamic, Avianca, Bechtel Corporation, Betfair UK, Catholic University Leuven (K.U. Leuven), Centene Corporation, Cerner, Charityshare, City of High Point, Clark Builders
Investcorp, Central Bancorp, Griffiths & Armour
Find out what your peers are saying about Citrix Gateway vs. Sangfor SSL VPN and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.