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

AlgoSec vs Azure Firewall Manager comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

AlgoSec
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
1st
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
246
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Azure Firewall Manager
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
11th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (26th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of AlgoSec is 15.8%, down from 22.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 3.6%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AlgoSec15.8%
Azure Firewall Manager3.6%
Other80.6%
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Konstantinos Apostolopoulos - PeerSpot reviewer
Firewall Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Centralized firewall workflows have accelerated rule implementation and provide clear app visibility
AlgoSec can be improved by putting AppViz more at the center. Specifically, I suggest customizing AppViz more, including features such as input validation that is not available in AppViz but is in FireFlow, or the ability to copy the AppViz object to the policy. Thus, AppViz should be at the center of their operations, not just as an endpoint in the implementation logic. One area that AlgoSec could do better is in the pricing. For example, mobile providers have different plans, but their plans are not based on a per-license model, and they usually offer an unlimited option. Therefore, I would expect AlgoSec to have a maximum payment cap per client while allowing unrestricted use of its resources.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This technology gives us total control of our stuff, validation, and clean up of everything that we need."
"FireFlow is great. In a company that gets a large volume of requests to open firewall rules, it's helpful to have one place that summarizes the requests, enabling you to clearly understand why they need to be implemented and also implement them. Firewall Analyzer can help you identify missing routing or check information on the firewall without the need to log into a firewall or router to check the routing. We have all that access in three clicks."
"It improves audibility and security by having instant access to firewall configurations."
"The firewall analyzer is great if you deploy a new firewall platform and need to see if it provides an adequate level of protection, where you don't have any dangerous rules."
"AlgoSec allows me to understand the inside of the firewall and brings simplicity to very complex firewall setups."
"AlgoSec has significantly enhanced our troubleshooting capabilities. We can quickly pinpoint the causes of routing issues and conduct traffic simulations to identify potential problems."
"Policy optimization, visibility, and a faster change management process has reduced unnecessary times required for manually changing processes, and the resources are now utilized more effectively for other areas."
"AlgoSec helps with this and our users are able to documents their rules."
"The tool's support is good."
"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."
"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."
"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 has improved our organization with its firewall."
"I would definitely recommend the solution to my clients, especially if one is using Azure Cloud."
 

Cons

"The only problem I have with AlgoSec is just its level of support, not with the product. Not with the organization or the documentation or anything else, but if I need any additional support, the only problem is the time it takes to get it."
"Our experience with the support is fair."
"There are sometimes issues with the Risky Rules reports where the number of hits is registering zero, but we know that this is incorrect because we have checked the rules and see that they are indeed registering traffic."
"Support for Layer 7 policies, including User-ID and threat profiles with Palo Alto firewalls, has been a pain point from us. We would like to include the additional info specifically because we believe it changes the riskiness of the rule if it is only set for a specific user or a group of users."
"The product or service could be improved by orchestration or automation that will help in changing the rule sets on the firewalls based on the detected used services/ports and IP addresses."
"The regulatory compliance rules."
"One of the things I don't like about AlgoSec is that when a customer has an issue with the platform, it takes time to resolve."
"It needs better API integration with its third-party firewall management."
"Microsoft was unable to fully solve the problem with email phishing and spamming."
"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."
"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. 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 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."
"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is very easy to set up. The pricing is relative to how you want to expand and harden your network security."
"The licensing scheme should be done in a simpler way. For example, if we delete a firewall and want to add a new one, then the license doesn't get freed up automatically. You have to request a new license to customer support and install it. If you are testing new implementations, this can be cumbersome."
"The pricing is flexible with a low cost setup."
"The pricing for this solution is not cheap, but we get good value for what we pay."
"Initially, it was more expensive, but we managed to negotiate the price. It's about average now."
"When I have active and standby firewalls, if I do an analysis of the active firewall and by mistake, I also do an analysis of the secondary or standby firewall, it'll consume two licenses from the total number of licenses I have. So, I need to change the license and make the active firewall secondary. They need to improve how they are counting the number of licenses."
"Cost is based on firewall. There are bundles, e.g., virtual firewalls might make the solution cheaper."
"When it comes to the cost of support and licensing, it is much cheaper than other competing products."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
7%
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business133
Midsize Enterprise39
Large Enterprise227
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AlgoSec?
I was not involved in the process of pricing, setup cost, and licensing. Our manager was dealing with the licenses while we focused on the technical side.
What needs improvement with AlgoSec?
AlgoSec could be improved by extending their products for security because they are very focused at the moment. They could have broader product lists, which would be a good idea. Regarding needed i...
What is your primary use case for AlgoSec?
My main use case for AlgoSec is for firewall management, auditing, and managing firewalls. A quick specific example of how I have used AlgoSec for firewall management and auditing is when we had mu...
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...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Maersk, Delta Airlines, Chevron, General Motors, T-Mobile, Chevron, AT&T, BP, Bell Canada, HCA Healthcare, Morgan Stanley, Unilever, Nationwide Insurance Enterprise, US Bank, Microsoft 
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about AlgoSec vs. Azure Firewall Manager and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.