Azure Firewall Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama comparison

Microsoft and Palo Alto Networks are both solutions in the Firewall Security Management category. Microsoft is ranked #10 with an average rating of 9.3, while Palo Alto Networks is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.5. Microsoft holds a 3.0% mindshare in Firewall Security Management, compared to Palo Alto Networks’s 8.2% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 97% of Palo Alto Networks users who would recommend it.

Azure Firewall Manager

Read 9 Azure Firewall Manager reviews

1,239 Views
669 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Read 93 Palo Alto Networks Panorama reviews

4,649 Views
4,091 Comparison Views

97% willing to recommend

Azure Firewall Manager

Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Palo Alto Networks Panorama and Azure Firewall Manager are competing in the network security management space. Panorama is often considered superior due to its robust security features and advanced threat prevention capabilities.

Features: Palo Alto Networks Panorama offers advanced threat prevention, centralized security management, and user-friendly interfaces that make it a strong option for large-scale operations. It provides comprehensive dashboards and a single pane of glass management approach. Azure Firewall Manager focuses on straightforward policy management, seamless integration with Azure services, and native support for cloud environments, making it ideal for organizations within the Azure ecosystem.

Room for Improvement: Palo Alto Networks Panorama could enhance automation capabilities and improve its cloud integration features. It may also benefit from a more intuitive initial configuration process. Azure Firewall Manager might expand its range of security features beyond basic functionality and improve support for non-Azure environments. There is also room for improving threat prevention capabilities and management interface enhancements.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Palo Alto Networks Panorama offers flexible deployment options and excellent support, making it suitable for tailored security solutions. Azure Firewall Manager simplifies deployment within Azure environments with built-in support and offers ease of integration, particularly for businesses already using Microsoft services.

Pricing and ROI: Palo Alto Networks Panorama might require a higher initial investment, but it offers long-term ROI with its advanced security measures. Azure Firewall Manager presents a more competitive pricing model for Azure users and integrates cost-effectively into Azure subscriptions, offering potential cost savings for businesses heavily utilizing Azure infrastructure.

To learn more, read our detailed Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 896,202 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

Azure Firewall Manager

Ranking in Firewall Security Management

10th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

4.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Microsoft Security Suite (26th)

Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Ranking in Firewall Security Management

4th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 3.0%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 8.2%, up from 7.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Firewall Security Management Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Palo Alto Networks Panorama	8.2%
Azure Firewall Manager	3.0%
Other	88.8%

Firewall Security Management

Featured Reviews

Sikkander Batcha

DevOps Engineer at CloudIQ

Has managed traffic effectively but lacks visibility and advanced control features

Azure Firewall is typically behind other vendor firewalls because we don't see what kind of traffic is traveling through it. That is one drawback. The main drawback is that we need log support from Azure Firewall, which can be quite costly. There is no login feature in Azure Firewall because only the IAM feature is available in the Azure site; we manage it only through the Azure portal, not through any other portal. Other vendors, such as Palo Alto, provide GUI or CLI interfaces to manage their firewalls, whereas we only manage Azure Firewall through the Azure portal. In the future, I would like to see additional features in Azure Firewall Manager to make it more competitive, such as technologies like App-ID and User-ID that Palo Alto has. Azure Firewall currently only allows traffic based on layer four and sometimes layer seven, so they need to improve in those areas compared to other vendors.

Read full review

Richard Dombo

Application Support Administrator at Meridian Port Services

Monitoring and managing multiple firewalls has become more efficient through centralized oversight and reliable logging

I would say that while Palo Alto Networks Panorama reporting capability is functional, it is not really intuitive. The presentation is not really as advanced as what an advanced solution would have provided. I would like to improve the dashboards on Palo Alto Networks Panorama, especially because I work in an environment where my managers are not really that technical. They do a great job leading us, but they do not have a technical background. If the dashboard could be improved to suit more executive use cases when it comes to reporting, that would be excellent. It is basic as far as I am concerned, and from an executive standpoint, it is not really that good. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama as a product nine or 9.5 out of ten because there is always room for improvement, especially on the dashboard. I think if they could improve the dashboard, I would give them ten out of ten because from a technical standpoint, the dashboard is good, but at an executive level, it is not really that good. I usually struggle when doing presentations to my bosses because the dashboard and reporting from Palo Alto Networks Panorama are not as polished as they could be.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Azure Firewall Manager centralizes network security management with a hub and spoke architecture."

"The best feature of Azure Firewall Manager is that it is easy to maintain and configure."

"The tool's support is good."

"The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration."

"We are utilizing Azure Entra ID for group labeling, so Active Directory, or now it is Entra ID, securing our application for everyone who accesses it, and Azure Firewall Manager is definitely securing our projects and all its features are fine."

"From a traffic management perspective, it's a good firewall because it's automatically scalable based on the traffic availability."

"The solution has improved our organization with its firewall."

"From a traffic management perspective, it's a good firewall because it's automatically scalable based on the traffic availability."

More Azure Firewall Manager pros

"Palo Alto Networks Panorama's stability has never been an issue for me."

"The solution works on a single pane of glass, so we have a good overview of everything happening."

"The best features Palo Alto Networks Panorama offers include the ability to manage multiple firewalls at one time."

"We use the solution for centralized monitoring."

"On the one or two occasions that I had to make use of technical support, I felt it to be pretty good."

"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Panorama are centralized management. We can manage all our firewalls."

"Palo Alto Networks Panorama is a centralized monitoring solution that can monitor remote locations, firewalls, configuration management, and patch updates on a single dashboard."

"Compared to other firewalls, this is the most reliable solution."

More Palo Alto Networks Panorama pros

Cons

"For Azure Firewall Manager, the learning curve for new people is a bit challenging, but the integration should be more straightforward for configuring a centralized system."

"The tool's security features need to improve. It needs also to include a monitoring system for logs. It is also complicated to find a query on the Azure firewall."

"Azure charges for many aspects including scaling, automated scaling deployment, and traffic management, which leads to higher costs."

"There should be a simple one-click deployment for a firewall, rather than a set of setup instructions that include steps such as the DNS configuration, et cetera."

"Azure charges for many aspects including scaling, automated scaling deployment, and traffic management, which leads to higher costs."

"The cost is a significant concern because we are in a region where the dollar is not our default currency, and converting to dollars makes it very expensive."

"With Azure Firewall, the problem is that the NAT-ing still has to be improved."

"The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users. Improvements in ease of configuration would benefit users significantly."

More Azure Firewall Manager cons

"There is room for improvement in the graphical user interface (GUI), which is becoming outdated, especially the NAT section."

"It could be more secure."

"An area for improvement would be the connectivity, which sometimes means logs can be slow to display."

"In the future, it would be beneficial if Panorama could include a firewall assurance feature similar to Skybox."

"It could be more secure."

"While we do want to be able to use the User-ID functionality of the firewalls, that kind of overhead is not acceptable."

"Price is probably one of the biggest things that we struggle with, specifically with Palo, and that's across their whole portfolio."

"The solution could improve by having a true single pane of glass environment for unified management. At the present time, you still have to use three or four different solutions to bring everything together."

More Palo Alto Networks Panorama cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."

"The price of the solution is reasonable but it is reasonable for the features."

"Sometimes the company prefers to give a license to test the product in our environment before we go to the customer. But the customer should buy his own license, and that's the system here. The system is different between one country and another. Some countries say that the IT solutions provider should provide the license."

"Its cost is quite high."

"The solution is relatively cheap; I rate it four out of five for affordability."

"The price of the licenses could be lower. Still, because we have Panorama with 25 firewalls, Palo Alto gives us a good discount."

"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."

"You only pay for the license and there are no additional costs."

"Initially, Palo Alto looks expensive, but if you dig deeper then you will find that it is very comparable, or even cheaper than other solutions."

"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is expensive."

More Palo Alto Networks Panorama pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

896,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

12%

Construction Company

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

10%

Comms Service Provider

10%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	2

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	34
Midsize Enterprise	14
Large Enterprise	46

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Firewall Manager?

The pricing for Azure Firewall Manager is expensive. In our project, we have used both Palo Alto Firewall and Azure Firewall. Azure charges for many aspects including scaling, automated scaling dep...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Azure Firewall Manager?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Azure Firewall Manager?

My customers are using Azure Firewall Manager, so I'm learning from both documentation and practical knowledge. I usually recommend Azure Firewall Manager for projects such as an animal hospital pr...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Panorama?

We did not purchase Palo Alto Networks Panorama through the Azure Marketplace. We purchased it directly through Palo Alto.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Panorama?

From a monitoring perspective, if we could improve on data retention and keep it for quite a long time, such as 90 days of data retention, that would be good for us to manage our CPU usage, as we c...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks Panorama?

My main use case for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is to manage our firewalls. We have around 450 firewalls, and we manage them through Panorama. Configuration entry is the primary focus of our use.

See all answers

Comparisons

Azure Firewall vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 17% of the time

FortiGate Cloud-Native Firewall (FortiGate CNF) vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 16% of the time

AlgoSec vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 11% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 11% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate Cloud vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 7% of the time

More Azure Firewall Manager Competitors

Fortinet FortiManager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Compared 13% of the time

AlgoSec vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Compared 12% of the time

FireMon Security Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Compared 11% of the time

Tufin Orchestration Suite vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Compared 9% of the time

Cisco Security Cloud Control vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Compared 4% of the time

More Palo Alto Networks Panorama Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Firewall Manager

May 2026

Download Azure Firewall Manager product report

Buyer's Guide

Palo Alto Networks Panorama

May 2026

Download Palo Alto Networks Panorama product report

Overview

Azure Firewall Manager offers easy configuration, centralized management, and automatic scalability. Its integration with Azure Entra ID provides secure access, while Power BI facilitates centralized monitoring, contributing to its cloud-native benefits and reliable network management.

Azure Firewall Manager is recognized for its efficient security policy management and the ability to configure and test firewall settings across multiple locations. Its integration with Azure Kubernetes supports cloud environment security and the seamless migration of on-premise components to the cloud. With its hub-and-spoke architecture, users can detect threats and orchestrate policies more effectively, although integration with open-source tools and technical support responsiveness could be enhanced. Improvements in NAT capabilities and an AI-driven phishing prevention system would enhance its offering.

What are Azure Firewall Manager's key features?

Easy Configuration: Simplifies firewall setup without additional plugins.
Centralized Security Management: Streamlines policy management across locations.
Automatic Scalability: Adjusts resources to meet changing demands seamlessly.
Integration with Azure Entra ID: Provides secure user access control.
Hub and Spoke Architecture: Enables efficient threat detection and policy orchestration.

What benefits and ROI should users evaluate?

Cloud-Native Benefits: Offers stability and seamless integration with cloud environments.
Fair Pricing: Competitive cost structure, despite currency conversion challenges.
Simplified Monitoring: Uses Power BI for comprehensive security insights.
Enhanced Security: Protects against phishing and ransomware threats.

Azure Firewall Manager is widely implemented in industries like finance to secure applications and manage B2B interactions. This tool supports endpoint security, traffic management, and seamless orchestrations within cloud environments, ensuring robust protection against various threats.

Microsoft

Palo Alto Networks Panorama offers centralized management, simplifying configuration and enhancing automation. Its robust security features and user-friendly interface support efficient operations, ideal for managing multiple firewalls across diverse environments.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is designed for enterprises looking to streamline security management across multiple locations. This solution simplifies device management and ensures consistent policy deployment. Equipped with advanced security features and flexible automation capabilities, it supports seamless scaling and real-time updating of firewalls globally. Robust logging and comprehensive reporting tools enhance monitoring and compliance, while application visibility and threat prevention provide thorough protection. Despite its merits, some users suggest improvements in deployment ease, integration, and support to maximize its effectiveness.

What are the key features of Palo Alto Networks Panorama?

Centralized Management: Controls multiple firewalls from a single platform.
Automation Capabilities: Automates configuration and updates for efficiency.
Advanced Security: Integrates threat prevention and application visibility.
Robust Logging and Reporting: Offers detailed logging and reporting tools.
Flexible Policy Deployment: Simplifies policy management across varied locations.
Scalability: Designed to handle enterprise-level networks with ease.

What benefits or ROI should users consider?

Operational Efficiency: Reduces time spent on manual configurations.
Security Enhancement: Strengthens security posture with integrated features.
Flexible Management: Adapts to diverse network environments seamlessly.
Cost Savings: Streamlines processes, potentially lowering operational costs.
Time Saving: Speeds up policy deployment and updates across systems.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama proves particularly effective in industries with extensive network infrastructures, such as telecommunications, finance, and education. Companies deploy it to maintain consistent security policies across campuses and data centers, efficiently managing the complexity of environments that span traditional networks and cloud-based systems.

Palo Alto Networks

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia

Buyer's Guide

Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama

April 2026

Free Report: Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

896,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama report.

See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.

We monitor all Firewall Security Management 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.