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 2.8% mindshare in Firewall Security Management, compared to Palo Alto Networks’s 7.8% 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

1,084 Views
618 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

Palo Alto Networks Panorama

Read 93 Palo Alto Networks Panorama reviews

4,195 Views
3,692 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: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 886,426 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 April 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 2.8%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 7.8%, down from 8.1% 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	7.8%
Azure Firewall Manager	2.8%
Other	89.4%

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 solution is very easy to set up."

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

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

"The tool's support is good."

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

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

More Azure Firewall Manager pros

"What I find brilliant in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is that you can create variables."

"We are attracted to Palo Alto because it is stable."

"Managing the firewalls in the branch locations from a central management console is easier."

"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is its ease of use."

"What's most valuable in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is that it allows us to see the status on the network side, particularly on the endpoint, because we also use it for the internal network."

"The solution is easy to use."

"The most valuable feature is that the management unit is centralized, so you can manage different regions from one place."

"The application ID, this kind of technology, has a very high-level check, and it makes everything more secure for your enterprise network."

More Palo Alto Networks Panorama pros

Cons

"The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users."

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

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

"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."

"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."

"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."

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

More Azure Firewall Manager cons

"The troubleshooting, the debugging part is also a little bit of a pain. It's not user-friendly on the interface to do our debugging when comparing it with other firewalls, like Forcepoint."

"The configuration could be a bit better."

"It should have more connection with Threat Intelligence Cloud. They can also include features related to SecOps and automation API."

"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."

"The product could offer more integration with other solutions."

"When extracting reports to a CSV file, the lack of correlation to the actual report generated is an issue. You get a CSV file with a vague name, which is inconvenient when sorting through multiple reports."

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

"It communicates with remote devices, and sometimes, there is a little bit of delay during its communication with remote devices. There should be real-time communication or updates from the manager to devices."

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."

"Cost-wise, it's very expensive."

"Pricing is high compared to other vendors in the same space. Licensing is also fairly high for different functions to be added on."

"The pricing model is reasonable for this class of solutions."

"Its cost is quite high."

"It is not a cheap solution."

"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama should be reduced. We pay for the solution annually."

"We're a reseller, and we're an MSSP. So, we get some extreme discounts."

"The solution is expensive and could be cheaper."

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

886,426 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Construction Company

11%

Educational Organization

Comms Service Provider

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

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	33
Midsize Enterprise	15
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

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

Compared 20% of the time

Azure Firewall vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 15% of the time

AlgoSec vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 13% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 9% of the time

FireMon Security Manager vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 9% 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 13% 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

April 2026

Download Azure Firewall Manager product report

Buyer's Guide

Palo Alto Networks Panorama

March 2026

Download Palo Alto Networks Panorama product report

Overview

Azure Firewall Manager is a security management service that provides central security policy and route management for cloud-based security perimeters.

To learn more about our solution, ask questions, and share feedback, join our Microsoft Security, Compliance and Identity Community.

Microsoft

Panorama network security management provides static rules and dynamic security updates in an ever-changing threat landscape. Reduce administrator workload and improve your overall security posture with a single rule base for firewall, threat prevention, URL filtering, application awareness, user identification, file blocking and data filtering.

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

March 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: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

886,426 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.