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

Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] vs FatPipe WAN Optimization comparison

Citrix and FatPipe Networks are both solutions in the WAN Optimization category. Additionally, 90% of Citrix users are willing to recommend the solution.
Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]
Read 22 Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] reviews
    90% willing to recommend
    FatPipe WAN Optimization
    • 110 Views
    • 36 Comparison Views
     

    Comparison Buyer's Guide

    Download the report
    Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 30, 2025

    Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] and FatPipe WAN Optimization are competing in network optimization. Citrix stands out with its pricing and support advantages, while FatPipe impresses with its extensive features, making it suitable for high-demand environments.

    Features: Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] is known for seamless network integration, enhanced security, and effective application performance management. FatPipe excels in robust optimization, flexible redundancy, and advanced traffic management. Both aim to boost network functionality, but FatPipe offers a broader feature set for demanding use cases.

    Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] provides an easy deployment process and extensive support, ideal for businesses with limited IT resources. FatPipe's setup is more complex but offset by responsive customer service and customization options tailored to specific needs. Citrix’s simpler deployment makes it accessible, while FatPipe's service-focused approach is advantageous.

    Pricing and ROI: Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] is less expensive initially, appealing to budget-conscious organizations, delivering satisfactory ROI under standard conditions. FatPipe's higher cost is justified by its superior optimization capabilities, yielding higher ROI in high-demand scenarios. Choice hinges on whether cost-saving or extensive feature utilization is prioritized.

    DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
    To learn more, read our detailed WAN Optimization Report (Updated: May 2025).
    Buyer's Guide
    WAN Optimization
    May 2025
    Download the complete report
    Helped 860,592 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

    Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]
    Average Rating
    8.2
    Reviews Sentiment
    7.4
    Number of Reviews
    22
    Ranking in other categories
    No ranking in other categories
    FatPipe WAN Optimization
    Average Rating
    0.0
    Number of Reviews
    0
    Ranking in other categories
    WAN Optimization (8th)
     

    Featured Reviews

    Rohit Ghorpade - PeerSpot reviewer
    A scalable solution for MCN controller but lacks technical supports, upgrades
    There are a few things that can be improved, are domain-based routing and the slowness of virtual parts, and it may be due to the wrong configuration, which we have been unable to find out. Previously, we faced some issues with the slowness part. Apart from that, feature like end gateway level antivirus. We are currently using a NetFlow proxy to establish a virtual position for the NetFlow. Our current environment has many use cases, but we are not using them on the Citrix SD-WAN. When I navigate the NCL part, it involves configuration. I want to highlight this disadvantage. Sometimes, when we push the configuration, it tries to push it to all branch locations. This process takes a lot of time, nearly 30 minutes, to push a single change from the NCL. Overall, I don't think Citrix meets our use cases what we have. This is based on my feedback after using it for the past year and working on this Citrix SD-WAN. However, from my experience, it is the worst solution I have seen. There's no domain-based routing, which is horrible. That's why we are moving to other products. We have checked our use case requirements with Fortinet, Palo Alto, and they meet them. I will consider the PoC or another OEM. There are many things in the area you need to be prompt, like the automation part. If any link or device goes down, alerting notification, etc. We need to perform and highlight so many things to your management. This should be improved.
    Read full review
    Use FatPipe WAN Optimization?
    Share your opinion
    report
    See which vendors are best for you
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which WAN Optimization solutions are best for your needs.
    See recommendations
    860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
     

    Top Industries

    By visitors reading reviews
    Computer Software Company
    26%
    Real Estate/Law Firm
    10%
    Educational Organization
    7%
    Financial Services Firm
    5%
    No data available
     

    Company Size

    By reviewers
    Large Enterprise
    Midsize Enterprise
    Small Business
    No data available
     

    Questions from the Community

    What do you like most about Citrix SD-WAN?
    It lowered our Internet costs and gave me the flexibility to choose providers based on each location's connectivity.
    See all answers
    What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Citrix SD-WAN?
    It is on the expensive side. I would give it an eight out of ten in terms of costliness. In my region, the approximate cost for the Citrix SD-WAN license is around $150 per user per year. However, ...
    See all answers
    What needs improvement with Citrix SD-WAN?
    The solution's licensing model could be improved. Citrix SD-WAN is a good product from a technical point of view. However, when you compare its licensing with the prices of competitors, you will se...
    See all answers
    Ask a question
    Earn 20 points
     

    Comparisons

    Fortinet FortiGate vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] Logo
    Fortinet FortiGate vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]
    Compared 35% of the time
    Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] Logo
    Aruba EdgeConnect SD-WAN Platform vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]
    Compared 32% of the time
    Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] Logo
    Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN vs Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]
    Compared 32% of the time
    More Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] Competitors
    No data available
     

    Product Reports

    Buyer's Guide
    Citrix SD-WAN [EOL]
    June 2025
    Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] reportDownload Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] product report
    Buyer's Guide
    WAN Optimization
    May 2025
    FatPipe WAN Optimization reportDownload FatPipe WAN Optimization product report
     

    Also Known As

    Citrix CloudBridge, WOC, NetScaler SD-WAN
    No data available
     

    Overview

    Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] enhances network stability, redundancy, and reliability, supporting connectivity between branches, optimizing internet access, and enabling secure, redundant networks, both on-premises and cloud-based.

    Corporations utilize Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] to improve network performance, minimize downtime, and ensure high availability. Combining communication methods and supporting interbranch internet routing, it assists businesses in transitioning from MPLS, centralizing monitoring, and optimizing bandwidth use. Its functionality includes secure connections, cost reductions, and effective management of internet access. The support for multiple communication methods, application reliability, and ease of implementation make it a valuable tool for modern network management.

    What key features does Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] offer?
    • Security: Enhanced protection to safeguard network data
    • IPv6 layering over IPv4: Ensures compatibility and future-proofing
    • Active-Active bandwidth use: Maximizes bandwidth utilization
    • Zero downtime failover: Maintains continuous operation during failures
    • Zero-touch deployment: Simplifies the installation process
    • Application reliability: Ensures high performance for critical applications
    • Cost-effectiveness: Reduces overall networking expenses
    • Central deployment: Facilitates easy configuration updates and management
    What benefits should users look for in Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] reviews?
    • Enhanced performance: Improved application and connectivity speed
    • Increased reliability: Minimized network downtime and interruptions
    • Centralized monitoring: Streamlined network oversight and control
    • Scalable security: Adaptable protection for evolving network needs
    • Cost savings: Lower operational costs compared to traditional MPLS
    • Flexibility: Ability to handle multiple network functions effectively

    Industries implement Citrix SD-WAN [EOL] to replace costly MPLS setups with more flexible VPN and NetScaler options, benefiting sectors like finance, healthcare, and retail that require robust, secure, and scalable network solutions. Organizations achieve better device management and efficient connectivity across multiple branches, enhancing their operational effectiveness.

    Citrix

    With FatPipe WAN Optimization, you can measurably increase productivity levels as it reduces response time for interactive applications, helps speed-up large data transfers between your headquarters, branches and data storage and/or disaster recovery sites, thereby increasing speed of data transfer between sites.

    FatPipe Networks
     

    Sample Customers

    AIDS Healthcare Foundation, Cornerstone Home Lending Inc., Dallara, ecVision, Essar, Eurofred, Groupe Promutuel, HMSHost Corporation, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines Ltd, Royal Caribbean International
    Information Not Available
    Buyer's Guide
    WAN Optimization
    May 2025
    Download Free Report
    Find out what your peers are saying about Cato Networks, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Riverbed and others in WAN Optimization. Updated: May 2025.
    DOWNLOAD NOW
    860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    See our list of best WAN Optimization vendors.

    We monitor all WAN Optimization 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.