We performed a comparison between Azure Firewall and Sophos XG based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: The main difference between these two products is the scalability. While Azure Firewall users say the scalability could be improved, users of Sophos XG are satisfied with the solution’s capability to scale. Azure users also mention that the interface and the reporting, logging, and monitoring features all need improvement.
"The inspection and web security features are most valuable."
"We purchased Fortinet because of the pricing, its functionality, because it met our requirements, and the total cost of ownership over five years was quite reasonable. In the market, Fortinet is rated quite well."
"The CLI is robust and powerful, enabling rapid, consistent changes via SSH."
"The most valuable feature is the VDOM, which allows the customer to have multiple firewalls in a single campus."
"Its user interface is good, and it is always working fine."
"We have been able to offer several services to customers in a single box."
"Its performance in fulfilling our requirements has been satisfactory."
"Fortinet FortiGate is easy to use."
"The solution should be capable of self-scaling, which is one of the features we like about it."
"Network filtering is valuable. The scalability capability from the cloud-native service helps us a lot because it simplifies our day-to-day maintenance activity."
"Great security and connectivity."
"Microsoft's technical support is very good. They're quite knowledgable and responsive."
"One of the best features is that it natively integrates with Azure Services and tools. When you have a third-party offering, that is not the case. But Azure Firewall provides a comprehensive and seamless security solution for your Azure resources."
"The most valuable feature is threat intelligence. It is based on filtering and can identify multiple threats."
"The solution can autoscale."
"In terms of the reporting, it's beautiful. It integrates with Azure monitoring and with Azure policies. That piece is a big help. You can set governing policies and you can use the application firewall, as well as the Azure Firewall, to enforce those policies."
"The initial setup is very straightforward and the solution is extremely user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature I have found to be the reporting function."
"I like the functionality and the user interface."
"Sophos XG has cybersecurity. It integrates with the antivirus software."
"We've deployed quite a number for our users and our customers, and the feedback is quite positive in terms of management and also administration."
"So far, I'm happy that they have recently added a firewall role, so I feel a little more comfortable with the security. The threat management is good."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the user management system."
"A valuable feature involves the solution's manageability."
"They should make the rule sets more understandable for the end user. When you're trying to explain to somebody how a computer network is secured, sometimes it's difficult for an end user or customer to understand. If there was a way to make the terminology more accessible to the end user, the set up could be easier. They should translate the technical jargon to an easily relatable and understandable conversation for the end user, the customer, that would be brilliant. Particularly in an environment where the IT structure is audited regularly, there's always pressure from the auditor to up the standards and up the security and you get your USCERT's that come out and there's a warning about this and the customer will want to lock out so much and when you apply it they run into issue where they can't search the internet or print to their remote office. Of course they can't print to your remote office, they just locked it up. They should make the language more understandable for the customer. If there's a product out there that made the jargon understandable to John Q. Public, I would buy that."
"The security of Fortinet FortiGate could improve."
"The support is the main thing that needs to be improved."
"A lack of integration between our data centers."
"Some of the filtering is not robust, you can escape it with a VPN. Some of the users bypass some of the filters. It catches some but it also misses some, that area could be improved. It's functioning reasonably but there's room for improvement in that area."
"This product could be improved with Active directory integration and better handling in IPsec and GRE Tunnels."
"The process of configuring firewall rules appears excessively complex."
"We had some issues in the beginning while setting it up, but after doing the firmware update, it is working fine."
"An Azure firewall is not a real firewall."
"Right now, with Azure Firewall, we cannot have a normal inbound traffic flow. For inbound, Microsoft suggests using application gateways, so the options are very limited. I cannot use this firewall as an intermediate firewall because of the limitations, and I cannot point routing to another firewall. So if I want to use back-to-back firewall architecture in my environment, I cannot use Azure Firewall for that type of configuration either."
"The threat intelligence part could be better. I don't see why our customers have to get an additional solution with Azure Firewall. It would be great if they made it on par with Palo Alto."
"It would be much easier if the on-premises, firewall rules, had some kind of export-import possibility in place, which is not the case right now."
"The tool needs to improve the onboarding and transition process for on-prem users."
"The interface could be improved, it's not very user friendly."
"The product could be made more customizable."
"We find it's different implementing it region-to-region. It might help if it was universal across all regions."
"It is already secure but it could be better in terms of other breaches that may occur."
"The vendor doesn’t publish the price on the website."
"We encounter difficulties while navigating through certain features and functionalities of the product."
"Could have a more simplified functionality for users."
"Their updates can be faster and more regular."
"Scalability could be improved. It could be better."
"I need to open the email to see what it contains and the value of it before I know whether to access it or not."
"The installation could be faster and is longer than that of other solutions, lasting more than a month instead of five minutes."
Azure Firewall is ranked 21st in Firewalls with 33 reviews while Sophos XG is ranked 7th in Firewalls with 192 reviews. Azure Firewall is rated 7.2, while Sophos XG is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Azure Firewall writes "Easy to use and configure but could be more robust". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos XG writes "Easy to use and deploy with an improved pricing structure in place". Azure Firewall is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Microsoft Defender for Cloud, Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and Zscaler Cloud Firewall, whereas Sophos XG is most compared with Netgate pfSense, OPNsense, Sophos XGS, SonicWall TZ and Meraki MX. See our Azure Firewall vs. Sophos XG report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.