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

Palo Alto Networks Panorama vs Tufin Orchestration Suite 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

Palo Alto Networks Panorama
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
4th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
90
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Tufin Orchestration Suite
Ranking in Firewall Security Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
184
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is 7.9%, down from 10.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tufin Orchestration Suite is 22.2%, up from 20.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Firewall Security Management
 

Featured Reviews

Waleed Aboda - PeerSpot reviewer
Centralized monitoring enhances control while seeking greater flexibility and rapid response
I am still working for Lotus. We work with Palo Alto three series, Panorama, and Firewall Banu, specifically Firewall three series and five series I find this solution valuable for full monitoring, centralized control for reporting, and centralized management. These features are instrumental in…
MithatBulut - PeerSpot reviewer
New employees can quickly grasp the various IPs, devices, and the network's logical and physical
Tufin is primarily used to orchestrate and manage network traffic and firewall devices. It is specifically useful for implementing firewall policies and handling requests from clients that require policy updates or changes Tufin simplifies understanding network topology. New employees can quickly…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like the quality of this product, and it performs. It's the best solution in the IT business."
"We use the solution for centralized monitoring."
"Threat prevention and traffic monitoring are the most valuable features for us."
"The threat prevention and layer seven security features were the most used and important for us. All operations are quite good in this solution."
"The most valuable feature is the Threat Intelligence."
"Everything about the reporting and everything about Palo Alto Networks Panorama is good."
"The most valuable feature is WildFire."
"The product can scale."
"We use this product to sharpen our change cycle. A request used to take quite a while as we did manual assessments. A lot of that is now done through SecureTrack."
"We can check and analyze the current status of our firewall rules."
"It provides a comprehensive overview of what our network looks like in terms of what is allowed and what is not, then how the traffic' is flowing with the Network Topology Map."
"The consolidation of other firewall vendors is very valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the compliance check and the recommendations that it makes."
"We are able to discover firewall rules that are too broad and widen the security footprint."
"Our customer has the ability to centrally monitor and view all changes that have been made in the network, and they are able to revert any problems that they encounter, if somebody has made a problematic change."
"We have a better view of our compliance status."
 

Cons

"The solution can improve by providing unique reports in relation to the function of which you choose the firewall to do."
"They need to do less bug-related releases and create versions that are stable for at least six months at a time. I don't find this issue in other solutions like Cisco, Check Point, FortiGate, or others. Those just provide a patch if there is a bug and we don't have to worry about downtime."
"Integration between Panorama and the Edge Firewall has a lot of issues, like different configuration assets, configuration object templates, lack of flexibility, and not a good browser."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"There is a need to improve the upgrade process. When we are upgrading the solution we are facing some issues with Elasticsearch services. Every time we upgrade it takes a long time to become stable."
"I would like more dashboard management."
"It should have more connection with Threat Intelligence Cloud. They can also include features related to SecOps and automation API."
"At times we have noticed that we get into issues where Panorama is going too slow or has other little problems. The performance can suffer occasionally."
"I would like easier integration with more automation."
"The initial setup of Tufin was complex. We had some issues with the architecture."
"We were just talking to them about usage for the F5 platform. They will not be going after specific environments, but a more OpenAPI. They will have other companies write it, etc. It's a little different than I had expected."
"I would like more enforcement. Right now. it's a lot of alerting. You see it in Tufin, but you have to go to Check Point or whatever device to make the actual action."
"Tufin Orchestration Suite is not commonly used in Thailand due to a lack of local support, and many customers are switching to AlgoSec or other vendors."
"I would really like to see a new UI for SecureChange. SecureTrack 2.0 has quite an improvement in the UI and it flows more smoothly. The current SecureTrack and SecureChange are a little blocky, and sometimes loading a tab or a page is required to refresh information. Whereas in SecureTrack 2.0, they're starting to improve on that."
"Our initial setup was complex from two dimensions, because we were deploying it globally and had to have a centralized view, but a distributed approach. We had it in Asia and North America, causing a slightly complicated approach."
"They are a little bit behind on some of their support for the Palo Alto firewall platform. I'd like to see that catch up, specifically around importing certain objects."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is very affordable when compared to more expensive firewalls."
"The solution is expensive and could be cheaper."
"The pricing is pretty average. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it a five."
"The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama could be lower."
"It is pretty reasonable as compared to other companies."
"Palo Alto products are generally priced higher compared to their competitors."
"Pricing for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is always high. If you're going to sell the product, you always have to talk about the technology because it should be about the solution rather than the price."
"It has freed up staff time, which is where we are seeing ROI."
"Tufin makes things a little easier. It lessens the amount of manual work which we have to do. It has a lot of benefits in terms of revenues, profits, employee costs, and operational costs. We have already seen return on investment."
"We have seen ROI from the side of operations, and we'll probably get to more of that as time goes on. However it took a while to get to that point."
"The licensing costs are around $250,000 to $300,000."
"For us, the pricing was six out of ten, with ten being the most expensive and one being the cheapest."
"Our licensing costs are three million total and then we pay for maintenance, which is an additional cost for three years."
"We've seen a decrease of about 50 percent in the overall time it takes to complete a firewall change."
"Tufin and AlgoSec were pretty much in the competitive price range, but this one provided us better integration into the Check Point environment."
"This solution helped us to reduce the time it takes to make changes. We used to spend up to an hour to do a change, and now, it's around five minutes."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewall Security Management solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
The most valuable aspect of Palo Alto Networks Panorama for me is the centralized management of multiple firewalls.
What needs improvement with Palo Alto Networks Panorama?
The solution requires more flexibility and quicker response times. High-speed replies are crucial. Additionally, the AI module should be on-premises, not in the cloud. It should support more flexib...
What do you like most about Tufin SecureCloud?
The most valuable feature of Tufin is security auditing. We are able to check the rules and compliance of the company, for example, what is allowed or not. We are able to check the rules over diffe...
What needs improvement with Tufin SecureCloud?
Tufin Orchestration Suite ( /products/tufin-orchestration-suite-reviews ) is not commonly used in Thailand due to a lack of local support, and many customers are switching to AlgoSec or other vendo...
What is your primary use case for Tufin SecureCloud?
I have primarily used Skybox and AlgoSec ( /products/algosec-reviews ). I have also interacted with FireMon for compiling. However, I am not currently working with ACA, and I don't have any project...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Tufin SecureCloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

University of Arkansas, JBG SMITH, Temple University, Telkom Indonesia
3M, AT&T, Blue Cross Blue Shield, BNP Parabas, ConocoPhillips, Deutsche Bank, GE, IBM, Pfizer, United States Postal Service 
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Panorama vs. Tufin Orchestration Suite and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.