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

Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama comparison

Cisco and Palo Alto Networks are both solutions in the Firewall Security Management category. Cisco is ranked #6 with an average rating of 8.1, while Palo Alto Networks is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.2. Cisco holds a 0.8% mindshare in Firewall Security Management, compared to Palo Alto Networks’s 8.6% mindshare. Additionally, 86% of Cisco users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 97% of Palo Alto Networks users who would recommend it.
Cisco Secure Firewall Manag...
Read 25 Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center reviews
  • 484 Views
  • 175 Comparison Views
86% willing to recommend
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Read 88 Palo Alto Networks Panorama reviews
  • 4,942 Views
  • 2,261 Comparison Views
97% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Palo Alto Networks Panorama and Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center compete in centralized firewall management. Users appreciate Panorama for its pricing and support, while Cisco's features make it compelling for those who value robust capabilities and comprehensive functionality.

Features: Palo Alto Networks Panorama is known for centralized management, scalability, and ease of use, with strong automation capabilities and robust reporting features. The automation and credential theft prevention make it notable, as is the ability to seamlessly manage multiple firewalls. Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is recognized for all-in-one firewall protection and centralized management critical for large network infrastructures.

Room for Improvement: Panorama users indicate room for improvement in pricing and complexity of managing multiple firewalls. Its documentation and integration with third-party products also need enhancement. Cisco users suggest improvements in user interface simplicity and cost, with some indicating performance issues tied to complex setups.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Panorama supports deployment models including hybrid cloud and on-premises and is praised for its versatile deployment options. Cisco Secure Firewall supports on-premises and private cloud deployments, with robust support noted despite occasional response delays for both.

Pricing and ROI: Palo Alto Networks Panorama is perceived as expensive yet offers strong ROI due to its extensive feature set and efficiency. Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center's cost is similar, with charges for additional features but offers flexible licensing for diverse user needs. Both provide potential ROI through increased productivity and centralized management.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama Report (Updated: January 2025).
Buyer's Guide
Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama
January 2025
Download the complete report
Helped 831,158 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

Cisco Secure Firewall Manag...
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
88
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is 0.8%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 8.6%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Awais Ejaz - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and reasonably priced product that protects organizations from malware
The product must improve its performance. When we push policies from the console, it takes a lot of time. It takes five to seven minutes to push one policy. If someone pushes a wrong policy and there is an outage in the banking system, they would have to wait six to seven minutes to revert it. We have highlighted this issue to Cisco. A year ago, we told Cisco that we need APIs for integration with SOAR for pushing policies. We cannot push policies or run playbooks from SOAR to block any IOCs on the web and email gateway because Cisco doesn’t expose the APIs. It is one thing for which we have been following up with Cisco for the last year, but I don't think they've developed the API integration. Palo Alto and Fortinet provide this feature to their users.
Read full review
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…
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

"Scalability is not an issue as long as you are able to buy additional licenses. Ten percent of our customers use Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center, and we have large accounts with 50% of their end users behind this firewall."
"I like its system management and filtering options as a layer seven firewall."
"One of the most valuable features of Cisco Secure Firewalls is their seamless integration with other Cisco products."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the intrusion prevention system."
"Malware detection, URL filtering, and antivirus are the most beneficial features for our security management. The platform has three main components: filters, hardware, and antivirus. We use the standard approach for automation and integration. The person in charge of management follows the rules and policies of the equipment and handles operations. However, we haven't set up any notifications, so it's mostly manual."
"The most valuable aspects are the antivirus and URL filtering."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The solution is useful and powerful."
More Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center pros
"The most valuable aspect of Palo Alto Networks Panorama for me is the centralized management of multiple firewalls."
"Palo Alto technical support is excellent."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Panorama are centralized management. We can manage all our firewalls."
"Firewalls: The application ID capabilities have been very useful for things like Active Directory, and not having to identify every port that Microsoft has decided to use."
"The interface is very easy to use. You can do most jobs from one single console."
"Overall, the functionality was very good."
"Especially for big, worldwide clients, one of the most valuable features is being able to create some rules to place on the security groups."
"All of the reports and events from different locations can be managed centrally."
More Palo Alto Networks Panorama pros
 

Cons

"The solution should improve the user interface."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The product could be improved by simplifying its user interface and reducing complexity."
"I recommend they work on usability and ensure the solution is more user-friendly."
"The performance of the Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center could be improved."
"The tool is a little bit pricey. I was not involved much with finance, but it appeared to be really expensive."
"Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center could improve by being less expensive."
"The product's setup could be easier."
More Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center cons
"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."
"At times we have noticed that we get into issues where Panorama is going too slow or has other little problems. The performance can suffer occasionally."
"The solution should improve the speed at which they make changes on the system. Historically, they've been a bit slow in that respect. They should apply changes to the box quicker and more often."
"Customer support can improve."
"I am observing that whenever pushing our configurations sometimes the configuration will not push properly and then we have to go to the individual firewall and save it again."
"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."
"The licensing costs are quite high."
"It could be easier to manage. In the future, it should be much easier because it's not very easy to manage. So in the next release, I think it should be much easier to manage, especially in the first configuration. It could also be more stable."
More Palo Alto Networks Panorama cons
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive. We have a multi-license, and we pay extra for support."
"I rate Secure Firewall Management Center eight out of 10 for pricing."
"Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center has the best price on the market."
"My license offers all the protection, like malware protection, VPN protection, IDS, IPS, and endpoint protection."
"The price of the solution is expensive. We do not have to pay more than the standard licensing fees."
"The solution is not expensive."
"As for pricing, the tool is expensive for us. I'd rate it eight out of ten on a scale where ten is the most expensive."
"The solution’s pricing is reasonable."
More Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center pricing and cost advice
"The pricing could be lower."
"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."
"You only pay for the license and there are no additional costs."
"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."
"If I were to rate the pricing of Palo on a scale of one to five, with one being really high and five being a good, reasonable price, I would rate Palo as a three."
"The pricing is pretty average. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it a five."
"We're a reseller, and we're an MSSP. So, we get some extreme discounts."
"Although I don't have direct knowledge of the setup cost I believe it is mid-range."
More Palo Alto Networks Panorama pricing and cost advice
report
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
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
19%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Engineering Company
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center?
The platform has significantly enhanced our organization's operations by providing secure communication channels between different office locations.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center?
The product pricing is reasonable and falls in the mid-range.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center?
We encountered challenges, particularly when building use cases for this firewall, as it requires specific OS versions and firmware upgrades, which can lead to increased downtime. It adds an admini...
See all answers
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.
See all answers
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
In large installations, it can be expensive with hardware appliances, however, virtual Panorama is well-priced and is sold every time there's a solution.
See all answers
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
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.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

AWS Firewall Manager vs Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Logo
AWS Firewall Manager vs Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center
Compared 70% of the time
More Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center Competitors
AlgoSec vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama Logo
AlgoSec vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Compared 21% of the time
Tufin Orchestration Suite vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama Logo
Tufin Orchestration Suite vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Compared 17% of the time
AWS Firewall Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama Logo
AWS Firewall Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Compared 14% of the time
Fortinet FortiGate Cloud vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama Logo
Fortinet FortiGate Cloud vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Compared 13% of the time
More Palo Alto Networks Panorama Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center
January 2025
Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center reportDownload Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center product report
Buyer's Guide
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
January 2025
Palo Alto Networks Panorama reportDownload Palo Alto Networks Panorama product report
 

Learn More

Cisco
Palo Alto Networks
 

Overview

The Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center is the administrative nerve center for select Cisco security products running on multiple platforms. It provides unified management of Cisco Secure Firewalls with Firewall Threat Defense (FTD) software for port and protocol control, application control, IPS, URL filtering, and malware protection functions. Firewall Management Center is the centralized event and policy manager for:

● Cisco Secure Firewall with the Firewall Threat Defense (FTD) OS

● Cisco ASA with FirePOWER Services

● Cisco Secure IPS (Firepower Next-Gen IPS / NGIPS)

● Cisco FirePOWER Threat Defense for ISR

● Cisco Malware Defense (AMP)

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.

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Buyer's Guide
Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama
January 2025
Free Report: Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Cisco Secure Firewall Management Center 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.