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

Palo Alto Networks Panorama vs Tufin Orchestration Suite 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

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
Tufin Orchestration Suite
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
184
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 8.1%, down from 10.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tufin Orchestration Suite is 22.0%, up from 20.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

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…
MithatBulut - PeerSpot reviewer
New employees can quickly grasp the various IPs, devices, and the network's logical and physical
Tufin is primarily used to orchestrate and manage network traffic and firewall devices. It is specifically useful for implementing firewall policies and handling requests from clients that require policy updates or changes Tufin simplifies understanding network topology. New employees can quickly…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The management and the deployment features are most valuable. We can easily deploy and manage the devices. We can do fast deployments without moving from our office and by just providing a short description to the end-user about how to install the physical device."
"The telemetry visibility is really good as well as the automated workflows for creating policies. The overall solution is quite intuitive to use."
"The most valuable item is centralization and we can get all of the router bases in a single window."
"The reporting is great."
"From a configuration point of view, when we are implementing it for large organizations where the customer owns a hundred firewalls, it's just easy to manage them all at one central location."
"Overall, the functionality was very good."
"Our team has the option to make configuration changes at any given time."
"I like its flexibility."
"SecureChange makes our lives easier with automation."
"You can easily scale the solution if you need to."
"It provides a comprehensive overview of what our network looks like in terms of what is allowed and what is not, then how the traffic' is flowing with the Network Topology Map."
"The most valuable function is the SecureChange where it is able to automate everything from the validation of the rules to the pushing of the rules."
"The features I have found most valuable are its capability to check on the firewall and the routers. Afterwards it checks out all the configs, checks the vulnerabilities, checks the risks - it checks everything that may end up causing our router to be compromised. At the end it recommendations what we should do."
"We use Tufin to clean up our firewall policies. It benefits us, because you can run a query for whatever your cleanup criteria is, e.g., "Has it been hit in 90 days?" It displays the list, then you can see the rules right there. If you want to get rid of it (or highlight it), then it creates a ticket that goes ahead and flags them all as disabled. While you can delete them, we always disable first. Then, we have a strip that comes back, and if it's been disabled for 90 days, then the system will remove them."
"Tufin has improved my organization with its configuration management. It has tremendously improved the operation's success and has made life easier."
"Tufin has made handling firewall rule request tickets more centralized and easier to manage."
 

Cons

"The configuration could be a bit better."
"It is very hard to understand the platform. It is not easy and user-friendly. You need a lot of experience to use Panorama. It is very complex, and you must know exactly what to do. I would like to have a more user-friendly product. FortiManager is comparatively very easy to use. It would be good if Panorama improves in terms of user-friendliness. It is also harder to use than Palo Alto Firewalls."
"Lacking in speed and reliability."
"Storage in Palo Alto Networks Panorama needs improvement. My company also experienced deployment issues when the product was first installed, particularly when binding with the firewall. It's not as user-friendly because not everyone can deploy it without some knowledge."
"The implementation is not that easy."
"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 can improve by providing unique reports in relation to the function of which you choose the firewall to do."
"Panorama needs to work on its configuration issues."
"The metrics need improvement. They need more consistency or understanding of automation, along lines of customization of automation."
"The firewall management is complex for beginners."
"The hardest piece is getting the matrix built."
"I would like to see API access into every aspect of Tufin."
"I would like to see improved role-based access."
"I would rate their reports as a four out of ten. I don't like the way that they are shown. It is too hard to export and send them to our clients."
"They've got such a large number of APIs, and it is so easy to use their APIs. Effectively, they allow us to use it with anything. The only way to improve it more is by offering support for implementing their APIs into certain hardware or software that we might use. They can provide support for implementing APIs."
"A limitation right now for compressed firewalls is the limited ability to see above a site level in terms of the Topology Mapping in the policy display. While Tufin's actively working on a solution, or at least they have this in the queue, from being able to view this on a higher level and how all of our site networks are connected, this ability would be useful, as we expect to have these compressed firewalls in place for quite some time."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"Palo Alto products are generally priced higher compared to their competitors."
"Its licensing is yearly and multi-yearly. It is not expensive."
"The solution is expensive and could be cheaper."
"Pricing for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is always high. If you're going to sell the product, you always have to talk about the technology because it should be about the solution rather than the price."
"The pricing is pretty average. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it a five."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama could be lower."
"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."
"It is expensive, but as compared to other players, it's more or less okay. Their pricing is not very transparent. This is my biggest point regarding Tufin. I've never seen a price list or something like that. It's always individual, and in many cases, it's very confusing to know what is the base and what is the price."
"The solution is more reasonably priced than its competitors."
"Tufin and AlgoSec were pretty much in the competitive price range, but this one provided us better integration into the Check Point environment."
"The cost is pretty high. It's close to seven figures."
"Licensing is available in both perpetual and subscription models, and it appears to be good for our scalable environments."
"We did look at less expensive solutions than Tufin, but being a corporation, this solution made sense."
"The solution has helped us to reduce the time it takes to make changes. With Tufin, it takes ten to 15 minutes. Before, it was 30 minutes or more."
"The price of Tufin could be lower."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What do you like most about Tufin SecureCloud?
The most valuable feature of Tufin is security auditing. We are able to check the rules and compliance of the company, for example, what is allowed or not. We are able to check the rules over diffe...
What needs improvement with Tufin SecureCloud?
Tufin Orchestration Suite ( /products/tufin-orchestration-suite-reviews ) is not commonly used in Thailand due to a lack of local support, and many customers are switching to AlgoSec or other vendo...
What is your primary use case for Tufin SecureCloud?
I have primarily used Skybox and AlgoSec ( /products/algosec-reviews ). I have also interacted with FireMon for compiling. However, I am not currently working with ACA, and I don't have any project...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Tufin SecureCloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
3M, AT&T, Blue Cross Blue Shield, BNP Parabas, ConocoPhillips, Deutsche Bank, GE, IBM, Pfizer, United States Postal Service 
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Panorama vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.