No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS Firewall Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

AWS Firewall Manager
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
9th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
93
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of AWS Firewall Manager is 4.4%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 8.8%, up from 6.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Palo Alto Networks Panorama8.8%
AWS Firewall Manager4.4%
Other86.8%
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Venda E - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Option Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Centralized security policies have streamlined audits and ensure consistent protection by default
One area for improvement is the reporting and customization option. The compliance reports are helpful, but having more granular insights or export options would make it even easier to use during audits. Also, support for more third-party integration could improve flexibility. Another improvement I need to see is a smoother setup experience. Some of the initial configuration steps, especially around the organization and permissions, can feel complex. A more guided setup or clear UI explanation would make it easier for teams to adopt quickly. One more improvement would be better alerting options. Right now, we mostly rely on AWS Security Hub or CloudWatch for detailed alerts. Having more built-in, real-time notification directly from AWS Firewall Manager would make it easier to monitor policy violations without extra setup.
Richard Dombo - PeerSpot reviewer
Application Support Administrator at Meridian Port Services
Monitoring and managing multiple firewalls has become more efficient through centralized oversight and reliable logging
I would say that while Palo Alto Networks Panorama reporting capability is functional, it is not really intuitive. The presentation is not really as advanced as what an advanced solution would have provided. I would like to improve the dashboards on Palo Alto Networks Panorama, especially because I work in an environment where my managers are not really that technical. They do a great job leading us, but they do not have a technical background. If the dashboard could be improved to suit more executive use cases when it comes to reporting, that would be excellent. It is basic as far as I am concerned, and from an executive standpoint, it is not really that good. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama as a product nine or 9.5 out of ten because there is always room for improvement, especially on the dashboard. I think if they could improve the dashboard, I would give them ten out of ten because from a technical standpoint, the dashboard is good, but at an executive level, it is not really that good. I usually struggle when doing presentations to my bosses because the dashboard and reporting from Palo Alto Networks Panorama are not as polished as they could be.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is helpful for our compliance, as the compliance manager manages compliance with leading industry standards such as FedRAMP, which my company complies with, GDPR laws, and ISO 27001."
"We work with compliance monitoring in the product, which is helpful for identifying framework-based misconfigurations, as it can tell you where to deploy firewall policies based on the frameworks."
"Also, the strength of the community is invaluable."
"The product is highly reliable."
"My advice for anybody who is considering the AWS Firewall Manager is that it is pretty simple to set up and easy to use."
"It has centralized cloud firewall management rules. It provides compliance in tracking and reporting."
"Overall, it improved our security posture and made audits much easier."
"Once this solution is set up, we hardly have to touch it."
"The solution works on a single pane of glass, so we have a good overview of everything happening."
"The threat prevention and layer seven security features were the most used and important for us, and all operations are quite good in this solution."
"The most valuable feature is that the management unit is centralized, so you can manage different regions from one place."
"The solution is suitable for all sized businesses."
"One of the key advantages of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is its unified platform that is quite similar to the firewall interface, making it easier for tech consultants to manage."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama is both scalable and stable."
"You don't need an overly experienced workforce to handle Palo Alto. It's very easy to use."
"We previously used Cisco ASA and we switched to Palo Alto Networks Panorama because it is a superior solution."
 

Cons

"The product could benefit from improvements in the user interface and integration capabilities."
"One area for improvement is the reporting and customization option."
"For AWS WAF, we have seen cases where it allowed suspicious HTTPS headers even if they carried malicious payloads."
"It needs to be more employee-friendly, and the security management could be more efficient."
"This solution is suitable for a small-scale enterprise and may not scale up to a very high volume of traffic or a large number of servers."
"AWS Firewall Manager should be open to manage other third-party appliances as well."
"Enabling and configuring the logging is not that straightforward."
"The areas of improvement are definitely platform resiliency, as we have seen outages on the AWS backbone, and whenever there is an outage on the AWS backbone, it impacts all the services hosted on that region, so we expect regional resiliency."
"The customer support needs to be better. Sometimes we need to wait for hours before getting someone from the product team or someone from the Palo Alto customer support to get on a call if we are facing some issue."
"Its scalability can be improved. It is too expensive to scale it in the way Palo Alto wants us to scale. Scalability is one of the main reasons why our customer is looking for alternatives. It is too expensive to scale. Its redundancy also requires improvement, but it seems that in the latest version, redundancy is improved, and you can have more than two devices in an HA pair. So, they are heading in that direction. It would be good if they combine their dynamic list functionality in a much better way with Panorama and include it as out-of-the-box functionality. Palo Alto supports the dynamic list functionality for some basic threats, but there is a lot of scope for improvement."
"It can take a few minutes to test to see if any changes are successful or not. This needs to be improved. A commit change should take a second, not a minute or more."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama is a more expensive solution than competitors. They should lower the price to stay competitive."
"The initial setup requires expertise and can be a bit complex."
"From a monitoring perspective, if we could improve on data retention and keep it for quite a long time, such as 90 days of data retention, that would be good for us to manage our CPU usage, as we can see CPU usage from Palo Alto Networks Panorama."
"From a storage perspective, I would like to see an improvement where logs can be compressed to make some space available."
"The solution's utilization of network ports makes things as complex as possible."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a cost-efficient product."
"From what I've heard from my colleagues, it appears that the pricing is competitive, which influenced our decision to choose this option."
"The licensing is on a pay-as-you-go basis and we are billed monthly."
"There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually."
"There is a license needed to use Palo Alto Networks Panorama. The cost is not that important, what is important is meeting all the requirements and security features."
"The price of the licenses could be lower. Still, because we have Panorama with 25 firewalls, Palo Alto gives us a good discount."
"The solution is expensive and could be cheaper."
"The pricing could be lower."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is high. There is a pay-per-use model."
"The pricing is considered a little bit expensive, but depending on the client, it's worth it."
"We have a yearly license. The cost is not that high and not that cheap either."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
921,714 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
11%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business34
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS Firewall Manager?
The pricing is reasonable and follows a pay-as-you-go model, which makes it cost-effective for scaling the environment. There is no significant setup cost since the native AWS services and licensin...
What needs improvement with AWS Firewall Manager?
AWS Firewall Manager could be improved with more granular policy customization for better visibility through enhanced dashboards and reporting. Simplifying the initial setup and providing clearer d...
What is your primary use case for AWS Firewall Manager?
My primary use case for AWS Firewall Manager is to centrally manage and enforce security policies across the multiple AWS accounts and resources within our organization. It helps to streamline the ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
We did not purchase Palo Alto Networks Panorama through the Azure Marketplace. We purchased it directly through Palo Alto.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
From a monitoring perspective, if we could improve on data retention and keep it for quite a long time, such as 90 days of data retention, that would be good for us to manage our CPU usage, as we c...
What is your primary use case for Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
My main use case for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is to manage our firewalls. We have around 450 firewalls, and we manage them through Panorama. Configuration entry is the primary focus of our use.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
921,714 professionals have used our research since 2012.