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

Azure Firewall Manager vs Skybox Security Suite comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 15, 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

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)
Skybox Security Suite
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
8th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
38
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (50th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 3.6%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Skybox Security Suite is 7.8%, down from 9.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Skybox Security Suite7.8%
Azure Firewall Manager3.6%
Other88.6%
Firewall Security Management
 

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.
AnoopBhat - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Architect at a tech vendor with 5,001-10,000 employees
Firewall policy management has improved access control but still needs simpler setup and upgrades
The features that I appreciated the most in Skybox Security Suite were not comparable with Tufin, as Tufin was far ahead in terms of the technology and the user interface. The effectiveness of the vulnerability management in Skybox Security Suite is an area I have not used that much. The firewall management feature has streamlined rule configuration and compliance in Skybox Security Suite and has evolved over time, but Tufin is far better. In terms of comparison between both tools, only the licensing part of Skybox had an edge. We were not renewing the licenses of Skybox every year, but in the case of other tools, we would have to renew if we wanted to use those tools. The disadvantages and weaknesses of Skybox Security Suite include the interface, complexity with setup, and upgrading. There are some smaller issues as well that would take more time to discuss, but there are ways around them. We use this tool to implement a new policy on the firewall by going to Skybox, creating a flow there, and then using an approval mechanism in place. There are two different levels of approvals which we have to go through, and once both approvers approve the request, we are ready to implement it. A specific challenge is that if we have to create a new object group and place ten different objects in that and use that object group in two different rules, we have to create the object group in the first rule and add the ten new objects. Then if we have to create another rule, we do not get an option to recall or reuse that same group which we created in the previous rule. We have to create a new object group again and then add the objects into it again. If we had created an object group once, we should have gotten an option to recall that or call that object group in the new rule, and that should have made the process easier.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration."
"The best feature of Azure Firewall Manager is that it is easy to maintain and configure."
"Azure Firewall Manager centralizes network security management with a hub and spoke architecture."
"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."
"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 solution has improved our organization with its firewall."
"The tool's support is good."
"Correlates logs and threats and prioritizes; provides network maps;p provides change result context and resulting vulnerability."
"Skybox deployment is simple, and it's very useful."
"The revalidation and policy recertifications are most valuable, and they are easy to understand in the GUI."
"The solution's simplicity of use is its most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the compliance, whether it's access compliance or the configuration compliance, to make sure that all of our devices are configured as they're supposed to be, to limit access as much possible, to follow least-access guidelines."
"Skybox is a great solution; I would absolutely recommend it to others."
"The implementation of Skybox is straightforward and you can integrate and get the logs and compliance reporting."
"Our customers have found that Skybox has a lot of good features and I don't expect that any of them will be changing to another product."
 

Cons

"With Azure Firewall, the problem is that the NAT-ing still has to be improved."
"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."
"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 solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."
"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. Improvements in ease of configuration would benefit users significantly."
"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 price is okay. This said, the solution is certainly expensive in comparison with other cloud services."
"There are multiple dashboards but no custom dashboard. It would be good to include a custom dashboard so that we can actually choose which field and what kinds of things we want to look at."
"During implementation, we realised approximately 30 devices were not supported by the Skybox platform​."
"There is room for improvement in device policy provisioning. However, modifications and the deletion of existing policies are currently unavailable or under enhancement."
"I've had issues with licensing where, when they were expiring and I asked for the updated licenses, I would the wrong ones. I think their process needs to be straightened out a little bit - I don't know if they fixed it already, it has been awhile. It wasn't as straightforward as it could have been."
"The price is costly, and I hope they can reduce the cost."
"As for room for improvement, there are issues in logging. The logs are not coming into the log."
"The setup documentation needs a lot of improvement."
"The company made bad business decisions impacting many clients and their own staff. Reporting could have been improved, and feature requests often were not implemented."
 

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."
"Licensing is normally on a yearly basis. There may also be a perpetual license. Normally, the customers ask for a lower price. If you want to sell more, you have to think about it."
"Fully understand the total cost of ownership. They have gone to a new model where you have to replace the hardware every X amount of years at a very substantial cost and fully understand your intended number of nodes. To operate a firewall, you have to pay two licenses, a firewall node and a network node. If you are a reasonable-sized organization, this gets expensive very quickly."
"I've seen the pricing of every solution on the market. When you compare apples to apples, where Skybox becomes exceedingly expensive is if you look at it compared to something like FireMon that only does a fraction of what Skybox does. But if you include everything that Skybox does, it becomes way more expensive than the competition, but you're also not comparing apples to apples. If you look at FireMon, and you look at like just the firewall assurance piece, they are fairly comparable and, actually, Skybox comes in a little bit cheaper in some cases, depending on which product you're looking at."
"Pricing is on the higher side. In terms of licensing, you should buy the complete suite rather than buying only the Change Manager. I think Change Manager with Vulnerability Control is something that would be interesting to look at."
"With licensing, the number of network nodes becomes very expensive to the point where you have to rationalize if the tools are warranted anymore."
"Skybox comes with extra licenses and has a change management license. The licenses are expensive, but they come with extra value."
"When compared with other companies, the license is more costly."
"I would rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
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
Construction Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
 

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 Business21
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise21
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Skybox Security Suite?
From a commercial perspective, AlgoSec is more expensive compared to Skybox Security Suite. Skybox Security Suite is cost-effective.
What needs improvement with Skybox Security Suite?
The features that I appreciated the most in Skybox Security Suite were not comparable with Tufin, as Tufin was far ahead in terms of the technology and the user interface. The effectiveness of the ...
What is your primary use case for Skybox Security Suite?
Skybox Security Suite is primarily used for allowing access on firewalls and getting the access to allow some connectivity on the firewall.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
ADP, Blue Cross Blue Shield, BT, USAID, Delta Dental, EDF Energy, EMC, HSBC, Johnson & Johnson
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall Manager vs. Skybox Security Suite and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.