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

Forcepoint ONE vs Fortinet FortiGate SWG comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

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

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (7th), ZTNA as a Service (10th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (9th)
Forcepoint ONE
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
21st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (12th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (15th)
Fortinet FortiGate SWG
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
43
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 2.1%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Forcepoint ONE is 1.7%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiGate SWG is 6.1%, down from 7.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Matt Crockford - PeerSpot reviewer
It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless
One aspect we value about iboss is its simplicity. Their customer service is brilliant, and they are super responsive and knowledgeable. It's easy to roll out, and their understanding of our business made it seamless. We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times. The user interface is highly intuitive. Our IT team picked it up with minimal training. It's arranged so that it's easy to find where things are. Another advantage is the single pane of glass console, which gives you visibility into what's happening. We're not fully there yet because we haven't implemented zero trust, but we're excited about the possibilities from the demos we've seen. We launched a POC of iboss' ChatGPT Risk Protection feature two weeks ago. AI is a great tool, but you need to be careful what you put into it. My biggest fear is employees inputting sensitive corporate information or customer PII data into one of these chatbots. I was impressed by our trial of the feature. It's exactly what we wanted. Now, when a user goes to ChatGPT, there's a banner warning them not to share information, and we can block conversations containing customer data like bank details and email addresses. I don't want to stop people from using it, but we need visibility. We've only tried it on a test group of 15 people. You can configure it to look for specific keywords or integrate it with your DLP policy if you have that configured
Edwin Eze-Osiago - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to deploy, stable, and scalable
Bitglass integration with some IDP providers needs improvement. Currently, the solution is not compatible with Azure AD for third-party authentication. The fraud proxy in the SmartEdge agent is not compatible with Forcepoint DLP or a web hybrid agent. I would like the developers to consolidate multiple agents across systems for better integration.
Ayman Said - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables seamless traffic handling and effective network protection
We are using Fortinet FortiGate SWG for web filtering, application control, and IDPS. Additionally, we utilize it for VPN and the main features of a firewall Web filtering is very good, as well as IDPS. SD-WAN is a perfect feature. Additionally, the VPN is stable and very good. These features…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"iboss is among the few products providing inline filtering where no application is needed on the device. It operates on the network side and is not device-based. This feature was one of the main reasons why we stayed with them for so long."
"Our primary use case for this product is DLP,"
"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"First of all, the security policies are essential. I do not have to rely solely on Active Directory for our users."
"Its initial setup was straightforward."
"The security aspect of the solution, particularly the malware behind it, is excellent. That's something that really helped us out. It's not just a simple proxy that just blocks the insights of potential threats that come on behind it. They do malware detection and that helps us a lot."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"The iboss system is highly reliable. The false positive rates are small compared to some other systems we've experienced through other partner agencies who use competing solutions."
"The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules."
"The control of web access by category is very effective."
"The most valuable feature was the website blocking capability, which allowed me to quickly block any dodgy websites."
"The pricing is very good and cheaper than other solutions like Netskope and Forcepoint."
"By default without a policy, Bitglass has the capability to notify the admin of multiple or simultaneous logins across a wide range of geographical regions."
"The initial setup was straightforward, which was a huge win. That mostly goes to the fact that they are agentless. We didn't have to sit there deploying thousands of agents and all the things that go along with that type of deployment. We were up and running very quickly."
"The core CASB solution is the most valuable part. It allows us to put policies in place around which devices can log into our cloud applications. We have a policy that states that only company devices can access these cloud applications."
"The most valuable features of Forcepoint include Zero Trust Network Access and remote user protection for private applications."
"The product is highly stable."
"The technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate SWG is its stability."
"The most valuable feature of Fortinet FortiGate SWG is inspection."
"Customers keep on improving their licenses. The solution remains scalable and flexible. On-premises deployments may have some limitations. However, cloud deployments offer a high degree of flexibility."
"It offers web filtering capabilities at a more affordable price compared to other solutions like PSMs or NETGEAR."
"It has the same functionalities throughout the range of products."
"Web filtering is the most useful feature."
 

Cons

"If they could implement an extra security layer preventing access to iboss from the open internet, it would be great."
"The solution could be stronger on the integration side and offer more cloud applications like G Suite or Oracle."
"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"Sometimes the agent stops working in iboss, and we have to reinstall the agent."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"Fold that in with the risk intelligence they're getting from all of the different subscriptions they are a part of. Now, these security companies subscribe to things like emerging threats, databases, etc. You can fold all this intelligence to decide what's happening on an endpoint. I would love to see them start moving into that space. That would compete directly with Microsoft. Maybe that's why they haven't. Having that ability native within the solution would be great. The other area in which I would love to see improvement is more detailed descriptions of why they block websites."
"Our biggest problem with their service was it did not recognize the device and filtering did not always work correctly."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"Initially, we had some challenges that Bitglass resolved quickly. The challenges were around communication. There didn't seem like there was the right level of communication within the Bitglass organization. Once we brought the issues up at a higher level, then they were resolved."
"Areas for improvement for the platform include addressing scalability and architecture concerns, especially for large deployments involving more than 500 or 1,000 users."
"We encounter challenges in determining whether certain features for blocking certain file types or preventing automatic downloads are functioning correctly."
"Integration into different multi-factor authentication tools. On their page, they tout Duo, but I don't use Duo. I use another vendor. Not that they don't interact, but it takes a little bit more doing. Any amount of efficiencies here would help."
"I wish they would advance more into the endpoint DLP solution. Currently they do not do anything around endpoint, they're still strictly cloud-based. The forward proxy is really the only thing they do. What I would like to see them do is to scan machines, workstations and servers, for information we might not want on those machines. That would be huge."
"I need control over access to web WhatsApp, which the solution cannot resolve yet."
"Their new SASE (secure access service edge) product would have been the one thing I would have requested. Now that they have that platform, I'd like to see it as integrated and seamless as possible with the core product. That's what they're working towards and that's where we're seeing the advancements."
"Bitglass integration with some IDP providers needs improvement."
"The solution is expensive."
"What could be improved in Fortinet FortiGate SWG is its pricing because it's a bit higher. If it's cheaper, my company could pitch it to customers and engage with customers better about it. What I'd like to see in the next release of Fortinet FortiGate SWG is an improvement in its dashboard or GUI. I'd like it to be more user-friendly."
"The product needs to drastically improve its reporting capability."
"Fortinet FortiGate SWG could improve the price, it is expensive."
"It could always be more secure."
"Fortinet FortiGate SWG's costs need improvement."
"Fortinet FortiGate SWG can be expensive for some customers."
"There's room for improvement in the interface, especially following their upgrade to version nineteen."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"There is training involved. If you're going to add more people to it, such as cross train more of your group, there's a cost. Other than that, that's it. We have paid exactly what the invoices have said. We signed a three-year contract and not gone above it."
"When considering only the cost, the solution may appear to be costly; however, when evaluated in terms of commercial value, Bitglass is not expensive."
"We have our pricing by user. We do our pricing agreements annually. There are also additional costs for maintenance."
"Typically, the longer you price forward, the better off you're going to be. They have been very willing to work with us on pricing."
"The product is reasonably priced compared to other vendors. I rate the pricing a two or three."
"The licensing cost for Forcepoint ONE would depend on the features, but the pricing is very competitive here in Brazil. The solution offers a good price, and I would rate it a three or a four in terms of pricing. I don't have information on whether there are additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees for Forcepoint ONE."
"It is a cost-effective solution that meets the user's needs."
"It could be more competitive and cost-effective."
"Pricing for Fortinet FortiGate SWG is more suitable for enterprise or large-sized organizations because they are the ones who can afford it versus small and medium-sized organizations."
"While slightly more affordable than competitors, it remains relatively expensive due to its inclusive subscription."
"The product is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"I rate the product's pricing a seven out of ten. The additional cost depends on the extra feature requirements."
"We pay about $4,000 for a yearly license, and there aren't any additional fees."
"When comparing this solution to others, I would rate it a ten out of ten in terms of pricing. However, the issue of requiring a separate license for redundancy is a drawback, and I would rate it a nine out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
14%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about iboss?
Content filtering is the most useful feature of iboss.
What needs improvement with iboss?
For zero trust implementation, we encountered complexity issues, especially with a large infrastructure company Exxon...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
Previously when I used iboss, we did the POC for iboss for ExxonMobil. Four or five people wanted to move from our ol...
What do you like most about Forcepoint ONE?
The platform's feature that has been most beneficial for our web security is its capability to replicate rules.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Forcepoint ONE?
The licensing and pricing were fine with no issues. I took over from somebody else, and it stayed as it was until we ...
What needs improvement with Forcepoint ONE?
There is room for improvement in making the reporting closer to real-time, ideally around five or ten minutes instead...
What do you like most about Fortinet FortiGate SWG?
The interface and other reports are all user-friendly.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Fortinet FortiGate SWG?
Fortinet products are very expensive compared to competitors like Sophos and SonicWall. From a pricing perspective, I...
What needs improvement with Fortinet FortiGate SWG?
More improvement in AI would be a good edge. We would like the VPN to act as a web filtering solution because users o...
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
Bitglass
FortiGate SWG, FortiGate Secure Web Gateway
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
UNC-Charlotte
Salt Lake County, Catholic College Bendigo, Azienda Unita Sanitaria
Find out what your peers are saying about Forcepoint ONE vs. Fortinet FortiGate SWG and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.