Compare FatPipe

Cato Networks vs FatPipe: Features, Pricing, and Performance

Side-by-side comparison of features, pricing, and reliability to find the best sd-wan & network security solution.

Comprehensive comparison of Cato Networks vs FatPipe SD-WAN platforms, with expert guidance from SmashByte's deployment team.

Why Compare Cato Networks vs FatPipe?

Both Cato Networks and FatPipe are established players in the sd-wan & network security market, but they take fundamentally different approaches to features, pricing, and support. This comparison helps you understand which platform aligns better with your specific requirements, existing infrastructure, and growth trajectory.

Key Differences at a Glance

  • Cato Networks: Known for initial sd-wan deployment took 8 months, but offers strong application-aware routing with deep packet inspection
  • FatPipe: Focuses on zero-touch provisioning with ship-to-site with emphasis on built-in wan optimization and deduplication

Feature Comparison

When evaluating SD-WAN platforms, the features that matter most depend on your use case. Cato Networks excels in certain scenarios—particularly for teams that prioritize application-aware routing with deep packet inspection—while FatPipe shines for organizations that need zero-touch provisioning with ship-to-site.

Pricing & Total Cost of Ownership

List price rarely tells the full story. Cato Networks and FatPipe have different pricing structures, volume discount thresholds, and hidden costs. SmashByte helps you calculate true 3-year TCO including implementation, training, and ongoing support.

SmashByte's Assessment

We've deployed both platforms across industries including healthcare, finance, and manufacturing. The "right" choice depends on factors like existing infrastructure, in-house technical expertise, compliance requirements, and growth plans.

Schedule a free consultation with SmashByte to get a customized comparison based on your specific environment. We'll provide pricing benchmarks, reference architectures, and implementation timelines for both options.

Issues Others Are Having

Initial SD-WAN deployment took 8 months

Creates operational bottlenecks and increases total cost of ownership.

Fix

SmashByte helps you evaluate which platform better addresses this through proof-of-concept testing.

Cannot see which apps are consuming bandwidth

Impacts deployment timeline and ongoing management complexity.

Fix

We provide implementation best practices and cost optimization strategies for both platforms.

Recommended Architecture

For most enterprises, we recommend a phased evaluation approach: start with a 30-day pilot of Cato Networks or FatPipe in a single department or location, establish clear success metrics, then scale based on results. SmashByte can help you design a proof-of-concept that minimizes risk while providing data-driven decision criteria.

Solutions by Need

See all →

Playbook

Need Application-aware routing with deep packet inspection? FatPipe vs Alternatives

The SD-WAN market offers many options, but only a few truly excel at application-aware routing with deep packet inspection.

View need page

Playbook

Need Built-in WAN optimization and deduplication? FatPipe vs Alternatives

Organizations struggle with running hybrid mpls + internet during migration, making built-in wan optimization and deduplication a critical requirement.

View need page

Playbook

Need Zero-touch provisioning with ship-to-site? FatPipe vs Alternatives

Zero-touch provisioning with ship-to-site isn't optional—it's essential for modern sd-wan & network security deployments. But not all platforms deliver it equally.

View need page