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

Azure Firewall Manager vs Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 (10th)
Microsoft Defender Vulnerab...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
17th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (17th), Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (16th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 1.5%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is 1.9%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management1.9%
Azure Firewall Manager1.5%
Other96.6%
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.
MK
Consultant at Dell Technologies
Asset discovery has helped prioritize risk and real-time intelligence provides stronger protection
Configuration of Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is something that needs improvement. In future updates of Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, I would like to see security enhancements. For example, for certain applications, even though the product has it, if the Windows Store is blocked, there is a bypass method using the WinGet command. The configuration part of Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is what should be focused on to be less complicated.

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 tool's support is good."
"The best feature of Azure Firewall Manager is that it is easy to maintain and configure."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"I would definitely recommend the solution to my clients, especially if one is using Azure Cloud."
"The most valuable feature is the web firewall, as it is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."
"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."
"From a traffic management perspective, it's a good firewall because it's automatically scalable based on the traffic availability."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"The most valuable aspect is the kind of assessment results I get, and the recommendations provided in Microsoft products really help in taking care of the resources."
"The product's stability is very high...The scalability of the product is amazing."
"The recommendations, scores, and steps to remediate actions are highly useful."
"Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management has streamlined our threat management processes and provided region-specific customization for our healthcare operations."
"Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is versatile and assesses vulnerabilities, providing detailed information on CVEs, their categories, and exploit statuses."
"Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is a good product, and I believe it deserves a positive recommendation."
"Overall, I would rate Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management a nine out of ten."
 

Cons

"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."
"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 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."
"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."
"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 solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
"Probably my only criticism would be the cost. It is expensive."
"The product is not stable; it is very resource-intensive, consuming a lot of memory and CPU, which makes it slow."
"There should be risk scoring added to Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management; specifically, they call it quantification of the risk."
"They may need to improve the portal refresh rate for Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management because it takes time for recommendations to disappear after mitigation; sometimes, it takes one week, when it should ideally take only one to two hours."
"The constant changes in the product configuration or the console setup can sometimes be challenging."
"Sometimes the stability of the agents could be improved."
"There is a good solution from Microsoft, however, there is a gap between Windows and Linux management."
"We have experienced some logging issues, including a few hours of downtime initially. Despite this, I would rate the overall stability as an eight."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"The price of the solution is reasonable but it is reasonable for the features."
"The licensing model follows a per-user per-month structure."
"I rate the product's price a three on a scale of one to ten, where one is a low price, and ten is a high price."
"The product’s pricing is medium."
"The licensing costs are reasonable."
"The tool is a bit costly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

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 Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise8
 

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 needs improvement with Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management?
Configuration of Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management is something that needs improvement. In future updates of Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, I would like to see security enha...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management?
I can control the applications using Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, which are its best features for me personally. I use the Asset Discovery tool in Microsoft Defender Vulnerability M...
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall Manager vs. Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.