Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

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
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (28th)
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
91
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 1.7%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 7.1%, down from 10.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

MuhammadShakeel - PeerSpot reviewer
Manages multiple firewalls effortlessly but faces challenges with cost efficiency
Azure Firewall Manager is good most of the time, but it could be improved regarding cost. 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 should calculate and show the products in local currencies, such as PKR or Bangladesh currency, and also introduce Indian currency similarly for Pakistan. The technical support could be improved. When a resource is assigned, that resource should follow the ticket and respond swiftly, including sending an email to inform me that an agent has been assigned. I still find myself waiting for an agent to connect with me and resolve my issues. I have not been integrating Azure Firewall Manager with Azure Virtual WAN.
Waleed Aboda - PeerSpot reviewer
Centralized monitoring enhances control while seeking greater flexibility and rapid response
I am still working for Lotus. We work with Palo Alto three series, Panorama, and Firewall Banu, specifically Firewall three series and five series I find this solution valuable for full monitoring, centralized control for reporting, and centralized management. These features are instrumental in…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution has improved our organization with its firewall."
"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."
"Azure Firewall Manager centralizes network security management with a hub and spoke architecture."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration."
"It is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."
"The best feature of Azure Firewall Manager is that it is easy to maintain and configure."
"The tool's support is good."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"What's most valuable in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is that it allows us to see the status on the network side, particularly on the endpoint, because we also use it for the internal network."
"Networks Panorama has improved our organizational security"
"Threat prevention and traffic monitoring are the most valuable features for us."
"The most valuable features of this solution are that it works better than a normal firewall, easy to explorer all of its features, and it has the Log Collector mode. This mode allows us to store our logs for two years in the solution itself."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama provides many features, such as alerts, traffic monitoring, and logs."
"All of the reports and events from different locations can be managed centrally."
"Panorama integrates security management by allowing easy modification of policy by account, IP, or application."
"The initial setup isn't very complex, it's user-friendly."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"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 configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users."
"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."
"The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users. Improvements in ease of configuration would benefit users significantly."
"The price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
"There is room for improvement in the integration within endpoint detection. They need to do some integration between endpoints and the firewalls."
"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."
"I am observing that whenever pushing our configurations sometimes the configuration will not push properly and then we have to go to the individual firewall and save it again."
"Clients need to have an alarm and alert system from which they can forward the trigger. The product needs to improve its integration as well."
"Storage in Palo Alto Networks Panorama needs improvement. My company also experienced deployment issues when the product was first installed, particularly when binding with the firewall. It's not as user-friendly because not everyone can deploy it without some knowledge."
"The integration between Strata Cloud Manager and Panorama could be enhanced to allow customers to stay on Panorama for many years while still utilizing Strata Cloud Manager for deployment."
"It should have more connection with Threat Intelligence Cloud. They can also include features related to SecOps and automation API."
"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."
 

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 is considered a little bit expensive, but depending on the client, it's worth it."
"Palo Alto is costly compared to Fortinet and Sophos."
"The solution is relatively cheap; I rate it four out of five for affordability."
"The solution is priced well and there is a license for this solution that we pay annually for."
"It is very affordable when compared to more expensive firewalls."
"The price of Panorama is expensive."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama has so many licenses. For example, it has threat protection and group protection licenses. One license depends on another. I find it more expensive than Cisco."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama could be lower."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Azure Firewall Manager?
The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Firewall Manager?
The pricing for Azure Firewall Manager seems okay compared to its good features. Although extra expenses are incurred for additional services, these are not directly related to the firewall, and th...
What needs improvement with Azure Firewall Manager?
Azure Firewall Manager is good most of the time, but it could be improved regarding cost. The cost is a significant concern because we are in a region where the dollar is not our default currency, ...
What do you like most about Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
The most valuable aspect of Palo Alto Networks Panorama for me is the centralized management of multiple firewalls.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
Palo Alto Networks Panorama is expensive but provides good value for money. For the higher end, the cost is justified. However, for the lower end, a reduction in cost could improve competitiveness.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
From the reporting side, naming the reports properly so that they can be easily identified would be an improvement. Other than that, it works well. There was a bug causing us to not get the latest ...
 

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: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.