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

AWS Firewall Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama 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

AWS Firewall Manager
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
12
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 June 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of AWS Firewall Manager is 3.5%, down from 4.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 8.5%, up from 7.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Palo Alto Networks Panorama8.5%
AWS Firewall Manager3.5%
Other88.0%
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

"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."
"The product is highly reliable."
"The most valuable feature is the centrally managed rule. I also like the central orchestration."
"It has centralized cloud firewall management rules. It provides compliance in tracking and reporting."
"The most valuable feature is scaling, which allows you to deploy one configuration and scan and deploy it across the network. The automated policy application feature also streamlines security operations."
"After implementing AWS Firewall Manager, we reduced our manual security configuration effort by around sixty to seventy percent as the policies are now centralized, managed, and automatically enforced."
"Once this solution is set up, we hardly have to touch it."
"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 decided to use Palo Alto Networks Panorama over other solutions because we have the strategy sheet which defines our requirements, and our requirements were mostly met."
"I would improve the management. I need to view charts and traffic statistics, but the management console doesn't share that information with me."
"It's easy to deploy any software or policies, and even if you have multiple devices across the globe, if you have urgent searching or maybe policy enforcement, you can do it easily."
"I really like the product."
"The entire ease of use is most valuable. If you're managing firewalls locally with PAN-OS, the look and feel of Panorama is the same. So, you don't have to relearn another product. If you're used to managing firewalls from Palo Alto, you can easily use Panorama to manage them. It looks and feels the same."
"Among our clients, it is actually one of the preferred solutions."
"Palo Alto's user interface is much more user-friendly than other platforms."
"What I find brilliant in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is that you can create variables."
 

Cons

"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 product could benefit from improvements in the user interface and integration capabilities."
"The system should be more customizable."
"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."
"It needs to be more employee-friendly, and the security management could be more efficient."
"For AWS WAF, we have seen cases where it allowed suspicious HTTPS headers even if they carried malicious payloads."
"I would like to see AWS add some UTM features to the firewall. It would also be great if AWS Firewall had native IPS/IDS. They have the separate IPS/IDS, GuardDuty."
"Enabling and configuring the logging is not that straightforward."
"Lacking in speed and reliability."
"The solution's utilization of network ports makes things as complex as possible."
"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."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama has some bugs that could be fixed."
"The pricing of the solution could be considered an area of improvement, as it is a comprehensive and feature-rich product that may include features that are not needed by some companies."
"The setup cost is too high."
"The pricing should be reconsidered. It's too high right now."
"The product could use some method of allowing for more customization and open integration with other controls."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The AWS Firewall Manager is a little on the costly side."
"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."
"Initially, Palo Alto looks expensive, but if you dig deeper then you will find that it is very comparable, or even cheaper than other solutions."
"It is very affordable when compared to more expensive firewalls."
"It is not a cheap solution."
"The pricing is pretty average. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it a five."
"Its licensing is yearly and multi-yearly. It is not expensive."
"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."
"There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually."
"You only pay for the license and there are no additional costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
900,196 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
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: June 2026.
900,196 professionals have used our research since 2012.