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

Azure Firewall vs Microsoft Purview Audit 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
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
11th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (10th)
Microsoft Purview Audit
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
31st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
5.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Log Management (35th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall is 2.8%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Purview Audit is 1.2%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Azure Firewall2.8%
Microsoft Purview Audit1.2%
Other96.0%
Microsoft Security Suite
 

Featured Reviews

AD
Technical Solution Architect at liwa
Has enabled us to manage internal access securely but lacks accessible documentation for deeper integration
We haven't required any support, but overall, Microsoft support is good. Whenever we raise any concern, they are supporting us on time. Currently it is good. We are not a public-facing company; it is a retail company only, so that's why I don't think it is required. We don't have an e-commerce solution on Azure. For that, we are using a different stack for the e-commerce portal, so that is not in Azure. We are only using it for business applications, and I think L3 filtering in network security suffices for our problem currently. Regarding scalability for Azure Firewall, we don't need it here because the request to the application is internal. All are internal users. So there is not much request to get into the application, so scalability is not required for us in the current scenario.
OK
Cloud Solution Engineer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Integrated auditing has strengthened data retention and improved incident investigations
I have seen areas for improvement, specifically in Microsoft Purview Audit or in general about Microsoft. I have had a situation with documentation. I had a customer who wanted to create alerts and they had Microsoft 365 Business Premium. In the documentation, it was noted that this license is enough for creating alerts. When we tried to make them, we noticed they cannot do it with Microsoft 365 E3 because the customer had limited features to manage alerts. The customer had to buy E3. We created Microsoft support requests, and they confirmed that the documentation displayed not the real situation and they have been going to update documentation. The same situation occurred now with implementing Microsoft Purview Audit in the last autumn. eDiscovery was combined with search and content search, and the documentation was not clear at the beginning. It was a little difficult to describe to customers that now it is a part of eDiscovery. Content search is a very simple functionality, while eDiscovery is a little difficult. I am not entirely sure why Microsoft is going in the way of combining these services because they are the same. However, for a customer who has never seen these services, it is difficult to understand quickly. The same situation occurs with litigation holds and some other holds. For any mail, I am trying to keep data. For example, emails are held for a year or two years, ten years, it does not matter. It is difficult to understand where to find this data and where these emails are being held. I need to use eDiscovery to find out all deleted data that was kept somewhere in some hidden folders of the mailbox. Regular customers and regular administrators know that on-premises Exchange, for example, allows them to find the data in some repository and review the list of kept data. However, with this hold, we do not have any functionality to review the list of kept data. It is difficult to understand for customers how to work with this. I had a case where I spent three or four hours working deeply with a customer to explain how to work with eDiscovery, why Content Search is not there when it was before, what is an eDiscovery case, and why we are talking about all of this just to review a list of kept emails. This is difficult.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The firewall policy control, URL content control, and antivirus are all the most valuable aspects. Threat prevention is as well quite good."
"The product's value to my company stems from its ability to secure my organization."
"We use the solution for application and server deployment."
"In terms of the reporting, it's beautiful. It integrates with Azure monitoring and with Azure policies. That piece is a big help. You can set governing policies and you can use the application firewall, as well as the Azure Firewall, to enforce those policies."
"It provided ease of maintenance. If a new firewall was needed, we only had to run the pipelines for this. So, the maintenance was very easy."
"I can easily configure it."
"Azure Firewall's feature that I have found most valuable is its scalability."
"The most valuable feature is threat intelligence. It is based on filtering and can identify multiple threats."
"The platform has significantly enhanced our operational insight into the overall Microsoft 365 environment."
"We're easily saving at least one hour per day using this solution."
"The overall user experience with Microsoft Purview Audit is of higher quality than when it was branded as Compliance Center, and Microsoft consistently updates and evolves functionalities and the overall experience."
"The main Microsoft feature is that it offers common integration of services, of data, of identity, meaning user accounts, user access, and privileged access."
 

Cons

"Azure Firewall has limited visibility for IDPS, no TLS inspection, no app ID, no user ID, no content ID, no device ID. There is no antivirus or anti-spyware. Azure Firewall doesn't scan traffic for malware unless it triggers an IDPS signature. There is no sandbox or machine learning functionality, meaning we are not protected from Zero-day threats. There is no DNS security and limited web categories."
"One thing that would help engineers adopt it better is the documentation."
"It has fewer features than you can get from other firewalls, like anti-spam and anti-phishing. Those kinds of things are not included. It only includes IDS and IDB."
"The solution should incorporate features similar to competitors like split tunneling."
"The threat intelligence part could be better. I don't see why our customers have to get an additional solution with Azure Firewall. It would be great if they made it on par with Palo Alto."
"I would appreciate it if Azure Firewall included built-in VPN capabilities."
"It needs a lot of improvement, especially on intruder detection. They are working hard on that."
"Currently, it only supports IP addresses, so you have to be specific about the IPs that are in your environment."
"We do have a Denial of Access happening."
"I had a case where I spent three or four hours working deeply with a customer to explain how to work with eDiscovery, why Content Search is not there when it was before, what is an eDiscovery case, and why we are talking about all of this just to review a list of kept emails."
"We are still in the early stages of leveraging Microsoft Purview Audit. Currently, it's primarily used for the audit function."
"Areas for product improvement include enhancing customization options and integrating more comprehensive compliance features."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product pricing a five out of ten."
"Azure Firewall is quite an expensive product."
"It is pay-as-you-go. So, you pay based on the usage. If I remember it well, there is a basic fee, and there is a traffic fee. It is not per month. It is per hour or something like that. It is not so expensive."
"Azure Firewalls operate on a pay-as-you-go model, similar to cloud services."
"The licensing module is good."
"The solution is cheaper than other brands. My company has an enterprise contract and we finally got a good price with Azure."
"Azure Firewall is more expensive. If Microsoft can make Azure Firewall cheaper, I can see that all clients will think of using it. One client used FortiGate because it is much cheaper. Some clients ask me for Cisco, but in the cloud estimate, I found its cost is the same as Azure Firewall."
"The pricing of Azure Firewall is pay-as-you-go. Fortinet also has a pay-as-you-go model, but Azure's pricing is higher and, with FortiGate, you also have the license."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise22
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is a better choice, Azure Firewall or Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls?
Azure Firewall Vs. Palo Alto Network NG Firewalls Both solutions provide stellar stability and security. Azure Firewall is easy to use and provides excellent support. Valuable features include int...
How does Azure Firewall compare with Palo Alto Networks VM Series?
Both products are very stable and easily scalable. The setup of Azure Firewall is easy and very user-friendly and the overall cost is reasonable. Azure Firewall offers a solid threat awareness, can...
Which would you recommend - FortiGate VM or Azure Firewall?
Both of these solutions are excellent options that provide flexible scalability and solid security. Fortinet Fortigate VM integrates well and has excellent centralized reporting. It is very easy to...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Purview Audit?
We are still in the early stages of leveraging Microsoft Purview Audit. Currently, it's primarily used for the audit function. In a year's time, we will be able to provide more clarity and context ...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Purview Audit?
Microsoft Purview Audit functions as a compliance center. Whenever these systems generate logs, we use Microsoft Purview Audit to capture or retrieve those logs. While there are more tools availabl...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall vs. Microsoft Purview Audit and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.