Azure Firewall Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama comparison

Why PeerSpot?

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 9.0. Microsoft holds a 3.8% mindshare in Firewall Security Management, compared to Palo Alto Networks’s 8.8% 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

1,989 Views
975 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Read 93 Palo Alto Networks Panorama reviews

6,909 Views
5,873 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: November 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama

November 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 921,523 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

5.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Microsoft Security Suite (25th)

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 November 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 3.8%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 8.8%, up from 6.9% 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	8.8%
Azure Firewall Manager	3.8%
Other	87.4%

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

"The most valuable feature is the web firewall, as it is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."

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

"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."

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

"The solution is very easy to set up."

"I would definitely recommend the solution to my clients, especially if one is using Azure Cloud."

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

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

More Azure Firewall Manager pros

"I found logging and management features the most valuable in Palo Alto Networks Panorama. Another good feature of the product is that it lets you define global firewall policies and templates."

"I would improve the management. I need to view charts and traffic statistics, but the management console doesn't share that information with me."

"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is its innovation and impressive capacity to handle network traffic efficiently."

"The entire ease of use is most valuable. If you're managing firewalls locally with PAN-OS, the look and feel of Panorama is the same. So, you don't have to relearn another product. If you're used to managing firewalls from Palo Alto, you can easily use Panorama to manage them. It looks and feels the same."

"This solution is user-friendly. It is centrally managed and provides role optimization, without the need for additional tools."

"It centralized the management of our Palo Alto systems."

"It is really useful for big deployments."

"Centralized firewall management and update management are the most valuable features."

More Palo Alto Networks Panorama pros

Cons

"Microsoft was unable to fully solve the problem with email phishing and spamming."

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

"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."

"We could do only one-way NAT-ing, where the traffic comes from outside to internal, to Azure, which is fine. However, when we actually do NAT-ed traffic to hit the firewall, that way is not working."

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

"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."

"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."

"The price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."

More Azure Firewall Manager cons

"Palo Alto Networks Panorama currently lacks the capability of integrating with other software, such as AlgoSec to simplify rule management and schedule management. However, this feature has been requested by the company and it is uncertain if Palo Alto will implement it in the future. Additionally, the UI needs improvement, it is too slow."

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

"The solution requires more flexibility and quicker response times."

"The product does need a bit of configuration. It's not quite ready to go out of the box."

"It's difficult to implement."

"Sometimes technical support is slow to respond."

"There is always room for improvement in anything."

"The setup cost is too high."

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."

"The pricing could be lower."

"We have a yearly license. The cost is not that high and not that cheap either."

"You can buy the hardware only and each box is not even $10,000. It's only $8,000 for the unit itself. However, then you are charged a three-year license at $81,000."

"The licensing is not cheap. There are always hidden costs. You have support costs, or maybe you need to buy more optics on how the solution fits into the rest of your environment. It is possible some of the rest of your environment will need to change too."

"Palo Alto is expensive and there are many cheaper firewalls, but they do not work as well."

"The pricing is pretty average. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it a five."

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."

"Palo Alto is costly compared to Fortinet and Sophos."

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

921,523 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Construction Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

Outsourcing Company

14%

Financial Services Firm

Construction Company

Manufacturing 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?

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 ...

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 hospita...

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 14% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 10% of the time

AlgoSec vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 9% of the time

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

Compared 8% of the time

AWS Firewall Manager vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 6% 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

Tufin Orchestration Suite vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Compared 10% of the time

FireMon Security Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Compared 9% of the time

Juniper SD Cloud vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Compared 4% of the time

More Palo Alto Networks Panorama Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Firewall Manager

November 2026

Download Azure Firewall Manager product report

Buyer's Guide

Palo Alto Networks Panorama

October 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

November 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: November 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

921,523 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.