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

Azure 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

Azure Firewall Manager
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
10th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (25th)
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 Azure Firewall Manager is 3.2%, up from 1.7% 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%
Azure Firewall Manager3.2%
Other88.3%
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Poornachandar  Madipoju - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior cloud Engineer at Softcell Technologies Limited
Centralized policies have streamlined multi-tenant security and now need better visibility tools
Azure Firewall Manager could be improved with better end-to-end visibility and more advanced policy simulation before deployment. We would also like more intuitive troubleshooting for rule conflicts, enhanced logging and analytics for policy impact analysis, and a more unified dashboard to simplify managing complex multi-region and multi-tenant firewall architecture. Another key improvement area for Azure Firewall Manager is better operational user experience for large-scale environments. We would benefit from more granular policy versioning and rollback controls, clearer change impact analysis before pushing updates, and deeper integration with monitoring tools to proactively detect misconfiguration or policy conflicts across hub and spoke deployments.
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 best feature of Azure Firewall Manager is that it is easy to maintain and configure."
"Azure Firewall Manager centralizes network security management with a hub and spoke architecture."
"The solution has improved our organization with its firewall."
"The most valuable feature is the web firewall, as it is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."
"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 most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"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."
"It is really useful for big deployments."
"The application ID or App-ID feature is a good feature for us. We are also using IPS and content inspection features. The firewall can inspect the packages that are passing through my network."
"It centralized the management of our Palo Alto systems."
"The solution is very stable. It's reliable. We don't experience bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash. It works as expected."
"It's easy to deploy any software or policies."
"The solution works on a single pane of glass, so we have a good overview of everything happening."
"When a customer has many locations and they would like to push policies to all of the firewalls from one central location, Panorama is the product that enables customers to do this."
"It has made our ROIs easier, but consolidating the correlation of data into one single point, which is pretty great."
 

Cons

"The cost is a significant concern because we are in a region where the dollar is not our default currency, and converting to dollars makes it very expensive."
"Microsoft was unable to fully solve the problem with email phishing and spamming."
"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."
"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
"The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users. Improvements in ease of configuration would benefit users significantly."
"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."
"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."
"Customer support is good, and the response time is sometimes late for complex issues, but for simple issues, the response time is very low."
"There is room for improvement in response time for tech support."
"The pricing should be reconsidered. It's too high right now."
"I would like to see more real-world testing before updates and patches are released in the live environment."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama could improve by making the solution less expensive."
"The general customer feedback is when saving the configuration, it takes a long time. That needs to be fixed. The troubleshooting, the debugging part is also a little bit of a pain. It's not user-friendly on the interface to do our debugging when comparing it with other firewalls, like Forcepoint."
"An area for improvement would be the connectivity, which sometimes means logs can be slow to display."
"It could be more secure."
"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."
 

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."
"You can buy the hardware only and each box is not even $10,000. It's only $8,000 for the unit itself. However, then you are charged a three-year license at $81,000."
"We pay approximately $3,000 a year in order to use the product."
"Its cost is quite high."
"It is pretty reasonable as compared to other companies."
"The pricing is considered a little bit expensive, but depending on the client, it's worth it."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama could be lower."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is high. There is a pay-per-use model."
"The pricing could be lower."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
899,917 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
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 Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business34
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise46
 

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 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

Information Not Available
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
899,917 professionals have used our research since 2012.