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
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
90
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 May 2025, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 7.9%, down from 10.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tufin Orchestration Suite is 22.2%, up from 20.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Waleed Aboda - PeerSpot reviewer
Centralized monitoring enhances control while seeking greater flexibility and rapid response
I am still working for Lotus. We work with Palo Alto three series, Panorama, and Firewall Banu, specifically Firewall three series and five series I find this solution valuable for full monitoring, centralized control for reporting, and centralized management. These features are instrumental in…
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 initial setup isn't very complex, it's user-friendly."
"We use the solution for centralized monitoring."
"It's helpful that the solution allows us to control all the firewalls from one device."
"It's great for creating signatures and activating activities."
"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."
"The most valuable features of this solution are that it works better than a normal firewall, easy to explorer all of its features, and it has the Log Collector mode. This mode allows us to store our logs for two years in the solution itself."
"In Panorama, installing the policy, and pushing the policy, it's quite seamless."
"This is an efficient solution."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting of our risk poster in our firewall."
"It has helped us to meet our compliance mandates. We have some requirements that we need to provide more visibility on the risk levels of our firewall base and Tufin helped us with that requirement."
"One of the biggest quick wins that we had with Tufin was cleaning up our firewall policies and rules. We cleaned out a lot of rules which helped our devices, longevity-wise, as well as speed-wise."
"Tufin is quite stable and typically does not require much troubleshooting."
"The visibility is huge. In order to figure out what was going on previously, we would have to pull stuff out of firewalls and put them in spreadsheets, then do sorts. Now, it's all right there in Tufin. We can write reports to look for what we need, ad hoc searches to find object groups, and know which firewalls are on. This was almost impossible to do previously."
"Comparing the rules and policy browser is valuable to me. It gives me the ability to pull running configs and be able to analyze them without having to go directly into the firewall."
"The stability is bulletproof."
"We built the policy comparison reporting into our processes that before we push any change to production, an engineer will stage actual date rule changes and policy changes. Another engineer will go in and do a comparison report of the last push policy to the last save, making sure what has been changed is what is expected to. From an operational excellence, it's huge for us. We have huge policies. All it takes is one accidental right click, delete, or backspace button, which could impact our business. So, this is something that we use almost day in and day out."
 

Cons

"The dual WAN functionality is missing in this solution."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama has some bugs that could be fixed."
"Clients need to have an alarm and alert system from which they can forward the trigger. The product needs to improve its integration as well."
"The product does need a bit of configuration. It's not quite ready to go out of the box."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in the graphical user interface (GUI), which is becoming outdated, especially the NAT section."
"Lacking in speed and reliability."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"I would like an improved reporting module which can be flexible (custom reports) and allow us to generate our own reports, because the data is already there."
"We found some bugs on the software, but we're working with tech support to fix them."
"The product that we have deployed for our main process gets bogged down in terms of its response. Maybe, we need to deploy a slightly smaller box. Eventually, we need to discuss this with Tufin is to see if we can move over to some sort of VM environment where we can add more processing power to it."
"There's a need for an improved network map."
"While Tufin is suitable for small businesses, issues can arise in larger enterprises, particularly concerning policy-based forwarding and NAT traffic."
"The GUI is limited with respect to how much you can develop and visualize the process."
"There are some missing features we'd like to see them add in the future."
"I would like the application to have faster response times. E.g., the dashboard may take up to two minutes to load. Or, when we do the topology seating its two and a half hours. I would like to get those times down and increase the efficiency of the product there."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive and could be cheaper."
"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 solution is priced well and there is a license for this solution that we pay annually for."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama should be reduced. We pay for the solution annually."
"You only pay for the license and there are no additional costs."
"Everyone, I suppose, would like the price to be improved. Price is always a good thing to change."
"Cost-wise, it's very expensive."
"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."
"Licensing is available in both perpetual and subscription models, and it appears to be good for our scalable environments."
"Tufin reduced the time it takes to solve a problem, which reduces the time of the outage."
"Pricing is quite high. We did compare it with AlgoSec but the pricing is not much different between the two."
"I believe our cost is more than $100,000 per year."
"The solution is more reasonably priced than its competitors."
"For us, the pricing was six out of ten, with ten being the most expensive and one being the cheapest."
"Our licensing fees are more than $100,000 USD per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
852,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
14%
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
Palo Alto Networks Panorama is expensive but provides good value for money. For the higher end, the cost is justified. However, for the lower end, a reduction in cost could improve competitiveness.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
From the reporting side, naming the reports properly so that they can be easily identified would be an improvement. Other than that, it works well. There was a bug causing us to not get the latest ...
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.
852,649 professionals have used our research since 2012.