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

Azure Firewall Manager vs Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Azure Firewall Manager
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
25th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Firewall Security Management (11th)
Microsoft Purview Complianc...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Data Governance (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 1.2%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager is 1.6%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager1.6%
Azure Firewall Manager1.2%
Other97.2%
Microsoft Security Suite
 

Featured Reviews

Sikkander  Batcha - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Engineer at CloudIQ
Has managed traffic effectively but lacks visibility and advanced control features
Azure Firewall is typically behind other vendor firewalls because we don't see what kind of traffic is traveling through it. That is one drawback. The main drawback is that we need log support from Azure Firewall, which can be quite costly. There is no login feature in Azure Firewall because only the IAM feature is available in the Azure site; we manage it only through the Azure portal, not through any other portal. Other vendors, such as Palo Alto, provide GUI or CLI interfaces to manage their firewalls, whereas we only manage Azure Firewall through the Azure portal. In the future, I would like to see additional features in Azure Firewall Manager to make it more competitive, such as technologies like App-ID and User-ID that Palo Alto has. Azure Firewall currently only allows traffic based on layer four and sometimes layer seven, so they need to improve in those areas compared to other vendors.
reviewer2797275 - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Engineer at a leisure / travel company with 201-500 employees
Compliance reporting has provided governance insights and now needs faster expert support access
I would rate Microsoft Support a six or seven on a scale of one to ten, depending on who you get. Microsoft could potentially improve by being able to reach the right people immediately instead of having to deal with lower-level support staff. As an enterprise customer, having that enterprise liaison is beneficial. I have a single point of contact for issues. Previously, when this was first set up without that liaison, calling support meant getting level one support who could not help, then level two support who also could not help, and finally reaching someone who could actually assist. Having a designated Microsoft representative or support person is definitely key.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We are utilizing Azure Entra ID for group labeling, so Active Directory, or now it is Entra ID, securing our application for everyone who accesses it, and Azure Firewall Manager is definitely securing our projects and all its features are fine."
"The best feature of Azure Firewall Manager is that it is easy to maintain and configure."
"From a traffic management perspective, it's a good firewall because it's automatically scalable based on the traffic availability."
"Azure Firewall Manager centralizes network security management with a hub and spoke architecture."
"The tool's support is good."
"It has helped us in multiple ways; for example, we don't require different spaces to manage it, we can do a lot of automation integrations into the code, we could integrate it into the DevOps pipeline, and it has helped us with our time-to-market for a very specific product when we are actually deploying or upgrading."
"The most valuable feature is the web firewall, as it is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"We have more visibility of data and how it is being shared."
"Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager's eDiscovery is essential for organizations using Outlook as their email service."
"Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager is tightly integrated with email solutions like Office 365."
"The best aspect is that it requires little to no time for implementation if I am using all of Microsoft's tools."
"The data classification reporting is helping us figure out what and where our people are storing files and why."
"The stability is a ten out of ten."
"The setup complexity depends on what features you want to implement in Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager."
"One of the valuable features of the tool is that it works effectively."
 

Cons

"The tool's security features need to improve. It needs also to include a monitoring system for logs. It is also complicated to find a query on the Azure firewall."
"With Azure Firewall, the problem is that the NAT-ing still has to be improved."
"The price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"We could do only one-way NAT-ing, where the traffic comes from outside to internal, to Azure, which is fine. However, when we actually do NAT-ed traffic to hit the firewall, that way is not working."
"There should be a simple one-click deployment for a firewall, rather than a set of setup instructions that include steps such as the DNS configuration, et cetera."
"Microsoft was unable to fully solve the problem with email phishing and spamming."
"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
"For Azure Firewall Manager, the learning curve for new people is a bit challenging, but the integration should be more straightforward for configuring a centralized system."
"Policy configuration, particularly for web interfaces and OCR scanning, presents challenges."
"We've had issues with data connectors for Teams."
"We'd like to see the solution expanded to include firewalls and endpoints."
"Integrating add-on licenses, which currently offer additional features at a cost, into the base product would be beneficial, especially for a charity organization to avoid incurring extra costs."
"Microsoft Purview has moved its portal from classic to premium with some display improvements, yet not much in options and functionalities."
"Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager is a stable product used by organizations utilizing Outlook as their email client. Despite stability, it needs to be more user-friendly and competitive compared to other eDiscovery tools."
"The speed and accessibility, particularly in the user interface, require significant work."
"When I tried to set up Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager for my organization to ensure people are not sending PII documents, especially payment cards, using keywords for flagging, it disrupted our services, so we had to deactivate it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the solution is reasonable but it is reasonable for the features."
"The solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"The pricing and licensing are moderate because we have other licenses for Microsoft services. The pricing is in line with that."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Educational Organization
9%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Firewall Manager?
The pricing for Azure Firewall Manager is expensive. In our project, we have used both Palo Alto Firewall and Azure Firewall. Azure charges for many aspects including scaling, automated scaling dep...
What needs improvement with Azure Firewall Manager?
Azure Firewall is typically behind other vendor firewalls because we don't see what kind of traffic is traveling through it. That is one drawback. The main drawback is that we need log support from...
What is your primary use case for Azure Firewall Manager?
My customers are using Azure Firewall Manager, so I'm learning from both documentation and practical knowledge. I usually recommend Azure Firewall Manager for projects such as an animal hospital pr...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager?
The pricing and setup cost is comparable to everything else that would be available regarding licensing. It was not excessively expensive. It is another expense to manage, but paying for the soluti...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager?
Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager is used for governance and checking to ensure that what is being put out there is correct and is not violating any corporate policies. We use it for data classi...
What advice do you have for others considering Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager?
I have experience with IronScales by chance or other similar products. It was not purchased through AWS Marketplace but was purchased through a vendor. We do deal with Intune with Microsoft. I have...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Microsoft Compliance Manager
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall Manager vs. Microsoft Purview Compliance Manager and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.