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

Palo Alto Networks Panorama vs Tufin Orchestration Suite comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 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

Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tufin Orchestration Suite
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
184
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 7.1%, down from 10.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tufin Orchestration Suite is 22.5%, up from 20.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Waleed Aboda - PeerSpot reviewer
Centralized monitoring enhances control while seeking greater flexibility and rapid response
I am still working for Lotus. We work with Palo Alto three series, Panorama, and Firewall Banu, specifically Firewall three series and five series I find this solution valuable for full monitoring, centralized control for reporting, and centralized management. These features are instrumental in…
MithatBulut - PeerSpot reviewer
New employees can quickly grasp the various IPs, devices, and the network's logical and physical
Tufin is primarily used to orchestrate and manage network traffic and firewall devices. It is specifically useful for implementing firewall policies and handling requests from clients that require policy updates or changes Tufin simplifies understanding network topology. New employees can quickly…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Managing the firewalls in the branch locations from a central management console is easier."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama is stable."
"It's easy to deploy any software or policies."
"It is great that the records go back to 30 days."
"From a configuration point of view, when we are implementing it for large organizations where the customer owns a hundred firewalls, it's just easy to manage them all at one central location."
"The interface is very easy to use. You can do most jobs from one single console."
"I like the quality of this product, and it performs. It's the best solution in the IT business."
"The firewall rules and policies are the most valuable aspects of the solution."
"I don't think that we were ever slow, but we can now say that changes are completed within twenty-four hours."
"The solution is good, and no clients complained about it."
"The most valuable feature is alerting, which lets me know when someone has made a change."
"A customer is able to submit a request for access and Tufin will automatically analyze the system to find out where the rule needs to go, and then design the rule for you."
"It offers automation capabilities that are very helpful, especially for network security orchestration and applying policies."
"The designer gives the ability to know where to add a rule, or if the rule is already in place."
"Valuable features include a central pane of management for all the firewalls and the ability to do queries on the rules and understand in which files the rules are configured."
"It provides a comprehensive overview of what our network looks like in terms of what is allowed and what is not, then how the traffic' is flowing with the Network Topology Map."
 

Cons

"I would like to see remote VPN, like the Cisco client."
"The integration between Strata Cloud Manager and Panorama could be enhanced to allow customers to stay on Panorama for many years while still utilizing Strata Cloud Manager for deployment."
"We have had some issues in the past because integrating a new device is not intuitive."
"The pricing of the solution could be considered an area of improvement, as it is a comprehensive and feature-rich product that may include features that are not needed by some companies."
"Reporting might be an area to improve. It can provide reporting or some sort of graphical representation of your environment."
"Its scalability can be improved. It is too expensive to scale it in the way Palo Alto wants us to scale. Scalability is one of the main reasons why our customer is looking for alternatives. It is too expensive to scale. Its redundancy also requires improvement, but it seems that in the latest version, redundancy is improved, and you can have more than two devices in an HA pair. So, they are heading in that direction. It would be good if they combine their dynamic list functionality in a much better way with Panorama and include it as out-of-the-box functionality. Palo Alto supports the dynamic list functionality for some basic threats, but there is a lot of scope for improvement."
"It should have more connection with Threat Intelligence Cloud. They can also include features related to SecOps and automation API."
"Sometimes technical support is slow to respond."
"They've got such a large number of APIs, and it is so easy to use their APIs. Effectively, they allow us to use it with anything. The only way to improve it more is by offering support for implementing their APIs into certain hardware or software that we might use. They can provide support for implementing APIs."
"I would really like to see a new UI for SecureChange. SecureTrack 2.0 has quite an improvement in the UI and it flows more smoothly. The current SecureTrack and SecureChange are a little blocky, and sometimes loading a tab or a page is required to refresh information. Whereas in SecureTrack 2.0, they're starting to improve on that."
"This solution increases the time it takes to make changes."
"There are things that could be explained a little better for somebody brand new to this system, which could be helpful, especially if it was in real-time while you were working in the system. Having the ability in real-time to be able to understand search query suggestions would be helpful."
"Currently, we are able to monitor access rules and the operating system of a firewall. It would be great if we can also monitor the configuration of the firewall through Tufin."
"I would like to see better report integration in this solution."
"We will be using the appliance based product, which cannot be scaled as much. It is a limitation in the hardware."
"Currently, we have to get different data from different sections of the site. It would be nice if it was all combined into one."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is high. There is a pay-per-use model."
"Its licensing is yearly and multi-yearly. It is not expensive."
"The product's pricing is high but flexible. It now follows the pay-per-use pricing model. I would rate the tool's pricing a five out of ten."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama has so many licenses. For example, it has threat protection and group protection licenses. One license depends on another. I find it more expensive than Cisco."
"It is very affordable when compared to more expensive firewalls."
"The pricing could be lower."
"The solution is priced a bit higher than competitors."
"The solution is relatively cheap; I rate it four out of five for affordability."
"Pricing is quite high. We did compare it with AlgoSec but the pricing is not much different between the two."
"It's quite an expensive solution."
"There are ways to deploy the license to different types of firewall. However, if we decide to change the physical brand of the firewall, we need to go back to Tufin and modify the licensing. This is a hassle."
"The licensing costs are a significant amount of money."
"We have seen ROI just in the time savings and knowledge. Knowledge is power. Having the solution do it automatically for you without you doing the work is huge. If you are spending $50,000 a year, it could have cost you a $100,000 in man-hours without it, especially if you are working with a team.."
"We have seen ROI from the side of operations, and we'll probably get to more of that as time goes on. However it took a while to get to that point."
"There is no issue with the pricing because we used a VM. That kept the cost low, as compared to an appliance."
"The cost is pretty high. It's close to seven figures."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
The most valuable aspect of Palo Alto Networks Panorama for me is the centralized management of multiple firewalls.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
Palo Alto Networks Panorama is expensive but provides good value for money. For the higher end, the cost is justified. However, for the lower end, a reduction in cost could improve competitiveness.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
From the reporting side, naming the reports properly so that they can be easily identified would be an improvement. Other than that, it works well. There was a bug causing us to not get the latest ...
What needs improvement with Tufin SecureCloud?
Tufin Orchestration Suite ( /products/tufin-orchestration-suite-reviews ) is not commonly used in Thailand due to a lack of local support, and many customers are switching to AlgoSec or other vendo...
What is your primary use case for Tufin SecureCloud?
I have primarily used Skybox and AlgoSec ( /products/algosec-reviews ). I have also interacted with FireMon for compiling. However, I am not currently working with ACA, and I don't have any project...
What advice do you have for others considering Tufin SecureCloud?
There is potential for improvement in explaining the analytics in the dashboard for Tufin Orchestration Suite. Tufin Orchestration Suite does provide good monitoring; however, interpreting the grap...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Tufin SecureCloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
3M, AT&T, Blue Cross Blue Shield, BNP Parabas, ConocoPhillips, Deutsche Bank, GE, IBM, Pfizer, United States Postal Service 
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Panorama vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.