Azure Firewall Manager vs Cisco Security Cloud Control comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Microsoft and Cisco are both solutions in the Firewall Security Management category. Microsoft is ranked #10 with an average rating of 9.3, while Cisco is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0. Microsoft holds a 3.7% mindshare in Firewall Security Management, compared to Cisco’s 4.5% mindshare. Additionally, 85% of Microsoft users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Cisco users who would recommend it.

Azure Firewall Manager

Read 9 Azure Firewall Manager reviews

1,835 Views
881 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

Cisco Security Cloud Control

Read 14 Cisco Security Cloud Control reviews

2,318 Views
2,318 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Azure Firewall Manager

Cisco Security Cloud Control

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

Cisco Security Cloud Control and Azure Firewall Manager both compete in the advanced security management solutions space. Based on the results of the comparison, Cisco appears to have the upper hand with its strong centralized device management and extensive support for multiple devices, enhancing operational management.

Features: Cisco Security Cloud Control provides comprehensive management across multiple devices, centralized upgrades for ASAs, supports ASA, FTD, and Meraki MX, and offers secure, cloud-based storage with two-factor authentication via OneProtect. Azure Firewall Manager offers automatic scalability, centralized network security with hub and spoke architecture, and strong integration with Azure services, enhancing threat detection and policy management capabilities.

Room for Improvement: Cisco Security Cloud Control could improve its interface, expand third-party integration, and enhance troubleshooting. Azure Firewall Manager needs better integration with open-source tools, improved ease of configuration, and better cost transparency to strengthen its competitive position.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cisco Security Cloud Control is available across public, private, and on-premises clouds, backed by responsive technical support with extensive feedback channels. Azure Firewall Manager is optimized for public cloud but lacks broad flexible deployment options. Its support efficiently resolves challenges though is primarily aligned with public cloud demands.

Pricing and ROI: Cisco Security Cloud Control presents significant ROI through automation and centralized management, justifying higher pricing with extensive features and quick value realization. Azure Firewall Manager offers competitive pricing but incurs additional costs compared to competitors like Palo Alto. Its ROI is influenced by higher operational expenses and benefits from scalable implementation. Both offer substantial benefits, though Cisco aligns strongly with enterprise security requirements.

To learn more, read our detailed Azure Firewall Manager vs. Cisco Security Cloud Control Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Azure Firewall Manager vs. Cisco Security Cloud Control

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 917,403 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

5.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Microsoft Security Suite (25th)

Cisco Security Cloud Control

Ranking in Firewall Security Management

11th

Average Rating

8.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Firewall Security Management category, the mindshare of Azure Firewall Manager is 3.7%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Cisco Security Cloud Control is 4.5%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Firewall Security Management Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Azure Firewall Manager	3.7%
Cisco Security Cloud Control	4.5%
Other	91.8%

Firewall Security Management

Featured Reviews

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

Francisco Delos Santos

Security Engineer at Metrobank

Automation reduces intervention and speeds up threat prevention

Our primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator is the automation of playbooks. We primarily use it for this purpose to streamline processes The most valuable feature is the automation, as it reduces user intervention and allows us to focus on other tasks. Since the system is automated,…

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

"Azure Firewall Manager centralizes network security management with a hub and spoke architecture."

"The most valuable feature of Azure Firewall Manager is the testing and configuration."

"The tool's support is good."

"The most valuable feature is the web firewall, as it is easy to install and does not require any plugins for your browser."

"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 solution is very easy to set up."

"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."

"I would definitely recommend the solution to my clients, especially if one is using Azure Cloud."

More Azure Firewall Manager pros

"We use a lot of image upgrades. We take some 20 devices and then we update everything at once, including the policies. We apply policies for groups. For certain groups, like anti-viruses, we send out policies and apply them to every single device. It's really easy and simple."

"The most valuable feature is the Intrusion prevention."

"The bulk changes feature is definitely the most valuable."

"This product provides excellent centralized device controls and reporting."

"There are a lot of templates that are already built-in. They give you quick-to-create and quick-to-apply policies that are typically a little more complicated for people."

"The ability to see the uptimes on the different VPNs that we have configured for site-to-site."

"With Cisco Defense Orchestrator, we can manage the complete Cisco Security solution, and it provides a simple and centralized way to manage all products."

"The most valuable feature is that you can push one policy or one rule out to several devices at a time."

More Cisco Security Cloud Control pros

Cons

"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."

"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."

"Microsoft was unable to fully solve the problem with email phishing and spamming."

"The solution can improve the integration with open-source tools."

"With Azure Firewall, the problem is that the NAT-ing still has to be improved."

"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."

More Azure Firewall Manager cons

"They should make it more of a one-stop shop for everything. It should have more features to manage FirePOWER appliances."

"When logging into the device, we sort of had problems with it staying in sync. If somebody made a change onsite, it wouldn't do an automatic sync. It would have to wait, as you would have to do a manual sync up."

"There could be some slight improvements to navigation."

"I'd like CDO to be the one-stop-shop where we could do all the configurations easily. It would be nice, for ASA upgrades, if we could do them from a central repository and not have to reach out to Cisco. That would be a definite plus."

"There could be some slight improvements to navigation. In some of the navigation you've got to go back to be able to get into where you need to be once you've made a change. If I make a change, I've then got to go back to submit and send the change."

"CDO doesn't have a report, an official report that I can check daily. It has another module called FTD, but it doesn't have that specifically for ASA. In the reporting, there are a lot of things that aren't there. There is also room for improvement in the daily monitoring."

"I wanted CDO to be a central place so where I could do everything but right now I don't think that's possible."

"Cisco Defense Orchestrator should be made more user-friendly overall. Currently, to use it effectively, one must be specific with the rule set that needs to be set up."

More Cisco Security Cloud Control 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."

"It's around £500 per unit for a three-year license."

"I work with a lot of clients, and the price or value of the Cisco Defense Orchestrator can vary from one client to another. If you have a lot of Cisco solutions, the price of the Cisco Defense Orchestrator is justified. Whereas if you have some security components from other vendors, such as Check Point or Palo Alto. This solution would be a pretty expensive proposition considering that they don't integrate with them well."

"After our free trial was done we got a subscription for three years and it was under $3,000 or so. It's part of the EA we already paid for, so I don't know what it would be if it was a la carte."

"It is about a $100 per year for an ASA 5506 firewall, and from there it keeps going up if you have a bigger box. For example, the 5516 is $200 to $300 per year."

"If you compare to what is available on the market, they are in the same range with respect to pricing."

"It is covered under the CIsco Enterprise License Agreement (ELA). So, it is licensed and ours."

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

917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Construction Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

Outsourcing Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Construction Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	2

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	6
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	5

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?

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 needs improvement with Cisco Defense Orchestrator?

Cisco Defense Orchestrator should be made more user-friendly overall. Currently, to use it effectively, one must be specific with the rule set that needs to be set up. Additionally, I suggest impro...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator?

Our primary use case for Cisco Defense Orchestrator is the automation of playbooks. We primarily use it for this purpose to streamline processes.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Cisco Defense Orchestrator?

Those who want to use Cisco Defense Orchestrator should build their own use case and see if it fits their environment. The most significant benefit for us is the response time because it automates ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Azure Firewall vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 13% of the time

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 9% of the time

FortiGate Cloud-Native Firewall (FortiGate CNF) vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 8% of the time

AlgoSec vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 8% of the time

Microsoft Defender XDR vs Azure Firewall Manager

Compared 3% of the time

More Azure Firewall Manager Competitors

AlgoSec vs Cisco Security Cloud Control

Compared 16% of the time

Tufin Orchestration Suite vs Cisco Security Cloud Control

Compared 14% of the time

Skybox Security Suite vs Cisco Security Cloud Control

Compared 10% of the time

Fortinet FortiGate Cloud vs Cisco Security Cloud Control

Compared 10% of the time

Opinnate vs Cisco Security Cloud Control

Compared 4% of the time

More Cisco Security Cloud Control Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Azure Firewall Manager

October 2026

Download Azure Firewall Manager product report

Buyer's Guide

Cisco Security Cloud Control

October 2026

Download Cisco Security Cloud Control product report

Also Known As

No data available

Cisco Defense Orchestrator, CDO

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

Microsoft

Cisco

Overview

Azure Firewall Manager offers easy configuration, centralized management, and automatic scalability. Its integration with Azure Entra ID provides secure access, while Power BI facilitates centralized monitoring, contributing to its cloud-native benefits and reliable network management.

Azure Firewall Manager is recognized for its efficient security policy management and the ability to configure and test firewall settings across multiple locations. Its integration with Azure Kubernetes supports cloud environment security and the seamless migration of on-premise components to the cloud. With its hub-and-spoke architecture, users can detect threats and orchestrate policies more effectively, although integration with open-source tools and technical support responsiveness could be enhanced. Improvements in NAT capabilities and an AI-driven phishing prevention system would enhance its offering.

What are Azure Firewall Manager's key features?

Easy Configuration: Simplifies firewall setup without additional plugins.
Centralized Security Management: Streamlines policy management across locations.
Automatic Scalability: Adjusts resources to meet changing demands seamlessly.
Integration with Azure Entra ID: Provides secure user access control.
Hub and Spoke Architecture: Enables efficient threat detection and policy orchestration.

What benefits and ROI should users evaluate?

Cloud-Native Benefits: Offers stability and seamless integration with cloud environments.
Fair Pricing: Competitive cost structure, despite currency conversion challenges.
Simplified Monitoring: Uses Power BI for comprehensive security insights.
Enhanced Security: Protects against phishing and ransomware threats.

Azure Firewall Manager is widely implemented in industries like finance to secure applications and manage B2B interactions. This tool supports endpoint security, traffic management, and seamless orchestrations within cloud environments, ensuring robust protection against various threats.

Microsoft

Cisco Security Cloud Control offers centralized management, real-time visibility, and AI-driven automation for on-premises and cloud environments, simplifying scalability and deployment.

With a unified approach, Cisco Security Cloud Control enhances security posture by providing cross-platform insights across Cisco's ecosystem. It accelerates threat detection and optimizes policy enforcement through a blend of AI automation and natural language querying capabilities. The intuitive platform serves multiple devices, enabling comprehensive management of Secure Firewall, Secure Access, and other services with guidance from the Cisco AI Assistant. It also includes an AI Operations feature that identifies critical issues and provides real-time insights, enhancing response times while a policy analyzer improves security hygiene by detecting and closing security gaps. Its automation minimizes manual tasks, secures cloud-stored configurations, and supports two-factor authentication. However, it could benefit from improvements in navigation clarity, bulk change handling, and expanded third-party integrations.

What are the key features of Cisco Security Cloud Control?

Centralized Device Control: Streamlines management with bulk policy upgrades and automation.
AI-Driven Automation: Reduces manual tasks and enhances threat detection.
Network Visibility: Provides insights with valuable reporting and intrusion prevention.
Intuitive Configuration: Enables easy policy adjustments and restoration of secure connections.

What benefits can users anticipate?

Increased Efficiency: Reduces operational overhead with centralized management.
Improved Security: Enhances protection through automated policy enforcement and AI insights.
Time Savings: Simplifies management of multiple devices in cloud and on-premises environments.
Scalability: Supports growth with ease of deployment and policy consistency.

Industries implementing Cisco Security Cloud Control leverage its capabilities for tasks ranging from firewall management to intrusion prevention. Enterprises use it to streamline policy management, automate configurations, and integrate Cisco devices with cloud strategies, benefiting from simplified security orchestration and network segmentation.

Cisco

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Insurance Company of British Columbia, Shawmut

Buyer's Guide

Azure Firewall Manager vs. Cisco Security Cloud Control

September 2026

Free Report: Azure Firewall Manager vs. Cisco Security Cloud Control

Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall Manager vs. Cisco Security Cloud Control and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

917,403 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Azure Firewall Manager vs. Cisco Security Cloud Control 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.