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
6th
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 September 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of AWS Firewall Manager is 4.2%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 8.8%, up from 7.1% 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 Manager4.2%
Other87.0%
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

"The product is highly reliable."
"AWS Firewall Manager isn't a separate solution when you create the virtual private cloud (VPC), so you can control the traffic through that security group."
"It has centralized cloud firewall management rules. It provides compliance in tracking and reporting."
"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."
"My advice for anybody who is considering the AWS Firewall Manager is that it is pretty simple to set up and easy to use."
"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."
"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."
"It has shared profiles for all gateways. If I do not have Panorama, I need to create a separate profile for each and every gateway by logging into that particular gateway, but with Panorama, I can create a shared profile and just push it down to each and every gateway connected to it."
"I would improve the management. I need to view charts and traffic statistics, but the management console doesn't share that information with me."
"Networks Panorama has improved our organizational security"
"What I find brilliant in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is that you can create variables."
"It has made our ROIs easier, but consolidating the correlation of data into one single point, which is pretty great."
"What I like most about this solution is that it allows me to push multiple policies on multiple followers at the same time."
"Support from Palo Alto is very good."
"Palo Alto is constantly improving its solutions."
 

Cons

"For AWS WAF, we have seen cases where it allowed suspicious HTTPS headers even if they carried malicious payloads."
"AWS Firewall Manager could be improved with more granular policy customization for better visibility through enhanced dashboards and reporting."
"The product could benefit from improvements in the user interface and integration capabilities."
"AWS Firewall Manager should be open to manage other third-party appliances as well."
"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."
"One area for improvement is the reporting and customization option."
"Enabling and configuring the logging is not that straightforward."
"They could consider organizing and enhancing documentation in a more structured and chronological manner"
"It is very hard to understand the platform. It is not easy and user-friendly."
"There were a few bugs a couple of years into it. There was a big bug where it had trouble communicating with the two main boxes."
"My company's getting whatever it needs from Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but in the cloud, there's an issue with CPU management, and that's an area for improvement. Though the normal data traffic doesn't go through the management interface, whenever there's an increase in the throughput, CPU management becomes high. If you increase the load, CPU management spikes, and it's what needs to be taken care of in Palo Alto Networks Panorama."
"The licensing costs are quite high."
"It communicates with remote devices, and sometimes, there is a little bit of delay during its communication with remote devices. There should be real-time communication or updates from the manager to devices."
"A bottleneck in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is the licensing. The licensing model for the product is complicated. Another area for improvement is the PDF report generation because you'll notice that it's missing some details."
"In the future, it would be beneficial if Panorama could include a firewall assurance feature similar to Skybox."
"Panorama needs to work on its configuration issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"From what I've heard from my colleagues, it appears that the pricing is competitive, which influenced our decision to choose this option."
"It is a cost-efficient product."
"The licensing is on a pay-as-you-go basis and we are billed monthly."
"We're a reseller, and we're an MSSP. So, we get some extreme discounts."
"The solution is priced well and there is a license for this solution that we pay annually for."
"The pricing is considered a little bit expensive, but depending on the client, it's worth it."
"Although I don't have direct knowledge of the setup cost I believe it is mid-range."
"Palo Alto products are generally priced higher compared to their competitors."
"Pricing is high compared to other vendors in the same space. Licensing is also fairly high for different functions to be added on."
"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."
"Cost-wise, it's very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
914,322 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
12%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Construction Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

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: September 2026.
914,322 professionals have used our research since 2012.