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

Opinnate vs Palo Alto Networks Panorama comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

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

Opinnate
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
12th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
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 Opinnate is 2.2%, up from 0.7% 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%
Opinnate2.2%
Other90.1%
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Fulya ALGÜL - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Network Security Specialist at Doğuş Teknoloji A.Ş
Good support, nice interface, and simple to upgrade
PDF format is not available for Alert Composer. There are file attachment or body content output options. The other issue is that the range object can be displayed in the rule viewer section. If we know the range object, we provide imaging, but if we do not know the range object, there is no imaging. It also allows adding range object rules when performing server cloning. In general, however, we have made successful progress since the POC process.
Richard Dombo - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Version upgrades can be done quickly."
"The platform is easy to deploy and maintain."
"The most valuable features of Palo Alto Networks Panorama are centralized management. We can manage all our firewalls."
"The main value of Palo Alto Networks Panorama lies in its ability to centralize management, similar to FortiManager."
"Technical support is quite helpful."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama is stable."
"Our team has the option to make configuration changes at any given time."
"It's a reliable solution."
"I would improve the management. I need to view charts and traffic statistics, but the management console doesn't share that information with me."
"The product can scale."
 

Cons

"PDF format is not available for Alert Composer."
"The product's web page view is very basic. They could add new features to it."
"We have experienced a few bugs which the team at Palo Alto don't have solutions for."
"An area for improvement would be the connectivity, which sometimes means logs can be slow to display."
"I would like to see remote VPN, like the Cisco client."
"The ease of use of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is an area for improvement. Another downside is that you need a lot of comprehension to understand what it is."
"The solution is extremely expensive. You can integrate it with other Palo Alto products, however, it ends up being too much."
"From a storage perspective, I would like to see an improvement where logs can be compressed to make some space available."
"A bottleneck in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is the licensing. The licensing model for the product is complicated. Another area for improvement is the PDF report generation because you'll notice that it's missing some details."
"Panorama needs to work on its configuration issues."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Opinnate is inexpensive than other products."
"The pricing model is reasonable for this class of solutions."
"Its cost is quite high."
"The pricing is considered a little bit expensive, but depending on the client, it's worth it."
"The pricing is pretty average. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it a five."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"Everyone, I suppose, would like the price to be improved. Price is always a good thing to change."
"Palo Alto Networks Panorama has so many licenses. For example, it has threat protection and group protection licenses. One license depends on another. I find it more expensive than Cisco."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
18%
Retailer
11%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
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
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise46
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Opinnate?
Version upgrades can be done quickly.
What needs improvement with Opinnate?
PDF format is not available for Alert Composer. There are file attachment or body content output options. The other issue is that the range object can be displayed in the rule viewer section. If we...
What is your primary use case for Opinnate?
We use Opinnate mostly to tighten firewall rules on the optimization side. cleaning shadow rules, deleting expired and disabled rules. The decommission feature is also a nice feature. The automatio...
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.
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...
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.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Doguş Teknoloji Bileşim A.S Tubitak Kamu SM Sompo Sigorta İsnet Yıldız Holding Arap Türk Bank ...
University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
Find out what your peers are saying about Opinnate vs. Palo Alto Networks Panorama and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.