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

Azure Firewall Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama 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

Azure Firewall Manager
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
12th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (27th)
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 1.6%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 8.1%, down from 10.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Rashedul Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Security management has improved with centralized threat detection and automation
I have been using Azure actively in my company, engaging with various technologies such as Azure SQL Server, virtual machines, and other cloud-dependent development scenarios. To secure the environment, we sometimes utilize Azure Firewall Manager. We needed to manage different individual firewalls…
Kim Ejby Lorentzen - PeerSpot reviewer
Unified firewall management streamlines operations across branches with prompt support services
The primary use case for this solution is the management of the entire firewall portfolio across various branches Palo Alto Networks Panorama has simplified management by providing a unified interface for firewall management and configuration. One of the key advantages of Palo Alto Networks…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The tool's support is good."
"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."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"Azure Firewall Manager centralizes network security management with a hub and spoke architecture."
"It is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."
"The solution has improved our organization with its firewall."
"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."
"Panorama has improved the organization by enabling log collection, administration, and optimization of firewall policies. It supports policy migration and offers platform stability and decent uptime."
"Panorama provides management functionalities."
"Panorama enables you to provision all your firewalls and other things as a cluster. It is quite useful for that."
"The application ID or App-ID feature is a good feature for us. We are also using IPS and content inspection features. The firewall can inspect the packages that are passing through my network."
"It's a reliable solution."
"Centralized management is a valuable feature."
"The initial setup isn't very complex, it's user-friendly."
 

Cons

"The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users."
"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."
"The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users. Improvements in ease of configuration would benefit users significantly."
"The price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"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."
"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."
"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
"There is always room for improvement in anything."
"There could be more integrations with third parties."
"Aside from pricing, I don't have any issues with Panorama."
"Lacking in speed and reliability."
"The product could offer more integration with other solutions."
"It is an expensive product."
"As the cybersecurity threats have become more aggressive these days, Palo Alto Networks Panorama can still be improved, particularly on the security side, for example, more network management, and penetration test. Improving the security feature for internal endpoints is needed in the solution."
"It would be beneficial to improve the capabilities of Panorama to handle logs more efficiently, potentially reducing the need for additional local collectors. Adding more predefined dashboards as features would enhance the monitoring and reporting capabilities."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the solution is reasonable but it is reasonable for the features."
"The solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"The pricing is considered a little bit expensive, but depending on the client, it's worth it."
"You only pay for the license and there are no additional costs."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama could be lower."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama should be reduced. We pay for the solution annually."
"The solution is priced a bit higher than competitors."
"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."
"Everyone, I suppose, would like the price to be improved. Price is always a good thing to change."
"Its cost is quite high."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Azure Firewall Manager?
The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Firewall Manager?
The pricing for Azure Firewall Manager seems okay compared to its good features. Although extra expenses are incurred for additional services, these are not directly related to the firewall, and th...
What needs improvement with Azure Firewall Manager?
The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users. Improvements in ease of configuration would benefit users significantly.
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 needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
The solution requires more flexibility and quicker response times. High-speed replies are crucial. Additionally, the AI module should be on-premises, not in the cloud. It should support more flexib...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.