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

Azure Firewall Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama comparison

Microsoft and Palo Alto Networks are both solutions in the Firewall Security Management category. Microsoft is ranked #10 with an average rating of 9.3, while Palo Alto Networks is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.5. Microsoft holds a 2.5% mindshare in Firewall Security Management, compared to Palo Alto Networks’s 7.7% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 97% of Palo Alto Networks users who would recommend it.
Azure Firewall Manager
Read 9 Azure Firewall Manager reviews
  • 956 Views
  • 564 Comparison Views
85% willing to recommend
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Read 93 Palo Alto Networks Panorama reviews
  • 3,802 Views
  • 3,460 Comparison Views
97% willing to recommend
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report
Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Palo Alto Networks Panorama and Azure Firewall Manager are competing in the network security management space. Panorama is often considered superior due to its robust security features and advanced threat prevention capabilities.

Features: Palo Alto Networks Panorama offers advanced threat prevention, centralized security management, and user-friendly interfaces that make it a strong option for large-scale operations. It provides comprehensive dashboards and a single pane of glass management approach. Azure Firewall Manager focuses on straightforward policy management, seamless integration with Azure services, and native support for cloud environments, making it ideal for organizations within the Azure ecosystem.

Room for Improvement: Palo Alto Networks Panorama could enhance automation capabilities and improve its cloud integration features. It may also benefit from a more intuitive initial configuration process. Azure Firewall Manager might expand its range of security features beyond basic functionality and improve support for non-Azure environments. There is also room for improving threat prevention capabilities and management interface enhancements.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Palo Alto Networks Panorama offers flexible deployment options and excellent support, making it suitable for tailored security solutions. Azure Firewall Manager simplifies deployment within Azure environments with built-in support and offers ease of integration, particularly for businesses already using Microsoft services.

Pricing and ROI: Palo Alto Networks Panorama might require a higher initial investment, but it offers long-term ROI with its advanced security measures. Azure Firewall Manager presents a more competitive pricing model for Azure users and integrates cost-effectively into Azure subscriptions, offering potential cost savings for businesses heavily utilizing Azure infrastructure.

DOWNLOAD THE COMPLETE REPORT
To learn more, read our detailed Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama Report (Updated: March 2026).
Buyer's Guide
Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama
March 2026
Download the complete report
Helped 884,976 peers since 2012

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
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.8
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (26th)
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 March 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 2.5%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 7.7%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Palo Alto Networks Panorama7.7%
Azure Firewall Manager2.5%
Other89.8%
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Sikkander Batcha - PeerSpot reviewer
Sikkander Batcha
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.
Read full review
Richard Dombo - PeerSpot reviewer
Richard Dombo
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.
Read full review

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."
"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."
"I would definitely recommend the solution to my clients, especially if one is using Azure Cloud."
"From a traffic management perspective, it's a good firewall because it's automatically scalable based on the traffic availability."
"The most valuable feature is the web firewall, as it is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration."
More Azure Firewall Manager pros
"You can easily troubleshoot any issue, you will also get clear information, and, in general, it's a very good product that allows you to manage more than one device from a central interface."
"Technical support with Palo Alto has been very good and responsive."
"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."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama's stability has never been an issue for me."
"The application ID, this kind of technology, has a very high-level check, and it makes everything more secure for your enterprise network."
"Implementing Palo Alto Panorama is something I would strongly recommend for people who are considering it that have a need for this kind of security solution."
"Templates and the possibility to apply a configuration to many devices at the same time are the most valuable features."
"I would improve the management. I need to view charts and traffic statistics, but the management console doesn't share that information with me."
More Palo Alto Networks Panorama pros
 

Cons

"Azure charges for many aspects including scaling, automated scaling deployment, and traffic management, which leads to higher costs."
"The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users."
"Microsoft was unable to fully solve the problem with email phishing and spamming."
"The price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"The configuration and settings require substantial time for learning, particularly for new users. Improvements in ease of configuration would benefit users significantly."
"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."
"With Azure Firewall, the problem is that the NAT-ing still has to be improved."
"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
More Azure Firewall Manager cons
"Panorama needs to work on its configuration issues."
"We have had some issues in the past because integrating a new device is not intuitive."
"The implementation is not that easy."
"Instead of searching their knowledge base in their website, maybe they can interact with us in the user interface to explain things better."
"Its scalability can be improved. It is too expensive to scale it in the way Palo Alto wants us to scale. Scalability is one of the main reasons why our customer is looking for alternatives. It is too expensive to scale. Its redundancy also requires improvement, but it seems that in the latest version, redundancy is improved, and you can have more than two devices in an HA pair. So, they are heading in that direction. It would be good if they combine their dynamic list functionality in a much better way with Panorama and include it as out-of-the-box functionality. Palo Alto supports the dynamic list functionality for some basic threats, but there is a lot of scope for improvement."
"We have had some issues in the past because integrating a new device is not intuitive."
"Price is probably one of the biggest things that we struggle with, specifically with Palo, and that's across their whole portfolio."
"When creating remote access for users, it would be beneficial to be able to base the object on on-premises or the cloud."
More Palo Alto Networks Panorama cons
 

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."
"My company pays for the licensing cost of Palo Alto Networks Panorama yearly, and it's all-inclusive, so there's no need to pay extra for some features."
"You only pay for the license and there are no additional costs."
"Its cost is quite high."
"Although I don't have direct knowledge of the setup cost I believe it is mid-range."
"The licensing is not cheap. There are always hidden costs. You have support costs, or maybe you need to buy more optics on how the solution fits into the rest of your environment. It is possible some of the rest of your environment will need to change too."
"The pricing model is reasonable for this class of solutions."
"The product's pricing is high but flexible. It now follows the pay-per-use pricing model. I would rate the tool's pricing a five out of ten."
"There is a license needed to use Palo Alto Networks Panorama. The cost is not that important, what is important is meeting all the requirements and security features."
More Palo Alto Networks Panorama pricing and cost advice
report
See which vendors are best for you
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
See recommendations
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Educational Organization
8%
University
6%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
 

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 Business33
Midsize Enterprise15
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...
See all answers
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...
See all answers
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...
See all answers
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.
See all answers
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...
See all answers
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.
See all answers
 

Comparisons

FortiGate Cloud-Native Firewall (FortiGate CNF) vs Azure Firewall Manager Logo
FortiGate Cloud-Native Firewall (FortiGate CNF) vs Azure Firewall Manager
Compared 21% of the time
Azure Firewall vs Azure Firewall Manager Logo
Azure Firewall vs Azure Firewall Manager
Compared 16% of the time
AlgoSec vs Azure Firewall Manager Logo
AlgoSec vs Azure Firewall Manager
Compared 15% of the time
FireMon Security Manager vs Azure Firewall Manager Logo
FireMon Security Manager vs Azure Firewall Manager
Compared 10% of the time
Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Azure Firewall Manager Logo
Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Azure Firewall Manager
Compared 8% of the time
More Azure Firewall Manager Competitors
AlgoSec vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama Logo
AlgoSec vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Compared 14% of the time
Fortinet FortiManager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama Logo
Fortinet FortiManager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Compared 13% of the time
FireMon Security Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama Logo
FireMon Security Manager vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Compared 11% of the time
Tufin Orchestration Suite vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama Logo
Tufin Orchestration Suite vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Compared 10% of the time
Juniper SD Cloud vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama Logo
Juniper SD Cloud vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Compared 3% of the time
More Palo Alto Networks Panorama Competitors
 

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide
Azure Firewall Manager
March 2026
Azure Firewall Manager reportDownload Azure Firewall Manager product report
Buyer's Guide
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
March 2026
Palo Alto Networks Panorama reportDownload Palo Alto Networks Panorama product report
 

Overview

Azure Firewall Manager is a security management service that provides central security policy and route management for cloud-based security perimeters.

To learn more about our solution, ask questions, and share feedback, join our Microsoft Security, Compliance and Identity Community.

Microsoft

Panorama network security management provides static rules and dynamic security updates in an ever-changing threat landscape. Reduce administrator workload and improve your overall security posture with a single rule base for firewall, threat prevention, URL filtering, application awareness, user identification, file blocking and data filtering.

Palo Alto Networks
 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Buyer's Guide
Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama
March 2026
Free Report: Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
DOWNLOAD NOW
884,976 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See our Azure Firewall Manager vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama report.
See our list of best Firewall Security Management vendors.

We monitor all Firewall Security Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.