Compare Azure Firewall vs. Meraki MX

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Azure Firewall Logo
15,838 views|13,527 comparisons
Meraki MX Logo
39,238 views|33,457 comparisons
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall vs. Meraki MX and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
534,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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 features of Cisco firewalls are the IPS and IDS items. We find them very helpful. Those are the biggest things because we have some odd, custom-made products in our environment. What we've found through their IPS and IDS is that their vulnerability engines have caught things that are near-Zero-day items, inside of our network.""The IPS, as well as the malware features, are the two things that we use the most and they're very valuable.""The protection and security features, like URL filtering, the inspection, and the IPS feature, are also very valuable for us. We don't have IT staff at most of the sites so for us it's important to have a robust firewall at those sites""We can easily track unauthorized users and see where traffic is going.""With the FMC and the FirePOWERs, the ability to quickly replace a piece of hardware without having to have a network outage is useful. Also, the ability to replace a piece of equipment and deploy the config that the previous piece of equipment had is pretty useful.""They wanted to leverage something which is equivalent that can give them the next gen features like application awareness and intrusion protection. So that is a major reason they were looking forward to this. The original ASA firewall did not have these features. This was the major reason the customer moved on to Cisco Firepower Threat Defense (FTD). Now they can go ahead and leverage those functionalities.""The Firepower+ISE+AMP for endpoint integration is something that really stands it out with other vendor solutions. They have something called pxGrid and i think it is already endorsed by IETF. This allows all devices on the network to communicate.""Being able to determine our active users vs inactive users has led us to increased productivity through visibility. Also, if an issue was happening with our throughput, then we wouldn't know without research. Now, notifications are more proactively happening."

More Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall Pros »

"The Layer four features are okay and meet my business needs.""The solution is very stable. When comparing it to other environments, it's actually quite impressive.""Performance and stability are the key features of this product.""The solution has many useful features. For example, the solution allows users to create virtual IP addresses.""Great security and connectivity.""We secure the entry point to the virtual data center with the firewall.""The most valuable feature is the integration into the overall cloud platform.""The solution can autoscale."

More Azure Firewall Pros »

"The most valuable feature is that we didn't have any problems with Meraki MX.""We've had no issues with the scalability or the stability of this solution""It has the most advanced security features, for example, layer 3 and layer 7 firewall capabilities and the end team and IPS protection. It also has IPS, and it has very good functioning of cloning services. You don't actually have to touch the device. If you have multiple companies in different countries, you don't really require this device to be touched. You can get it delivered directly to any office of a country, and then you can simply put your configuration over the cloud. It's very simplified and easy to manage. It gives a very good granular visibility about your network. Earlier, a lot of things were lacking in the network. We were unable to identify where the problem was, but after implementing Meraki MX, we are able to dig down and identify where is the problem. We can easily and quickly identify the sources and the root causes of the issues.""Point-to-point VPNs can dynamically follow IP changes with no need for static IPs.""Dual WAN connections are greatly simplified and point-to-point VPNs automatically connect regardless of what WAN connection is active.""It has very good features; it's easy to use, configure, set up, and deploy.""It is very easy to use and manage. It is also very easy to scale.""In general, Meraki MX is easy to work with."

More Meraki MX Pros »

Cons
"The worst part of the entire solution, and this is kind of trivial at times, is that management of the solution is difficult. You manage FireSIGHT through an internet browser. I've had Cisco tell me to manage it through Firefox because that's how they develop it. The problem is, depending on the page you're on, they don't function in the same way. The pages can be very buggy, or you can't resize columns in this one, or you can't do certain things in that one. It causes a headache in managing it.""For the new line of FTDs, the performance could be improved. We sometimes have issues with the 41 series, depending what we activate. If we activate too many intrusion policies, it affects the CPU.""The user interface for the Firepower management console is a little bit different from traditional Cisco management tools. If you look at products we already use, like Cisco Prime or other products that are cloud-based, they have a more modern user interface for managing the products. For Firepower, the user interface is not very user-friendly. It's a little bit confusing sometimes.""We would like to see improvement in recovery. If there is an issue that forces us to do recovery, we have to restart or reboot. In addition, sometimes we have downtime during the maintenance windows. If Cisco could enhance this, so that upgrades would not necessarily require downtime, that would be helpful.""We had an event recently where we had inbound traffic for SIP and we experienced an attack against our SIP endpoint, such that they were able to successfully make calls out... Both CTR, which is gathering data from multiple solutions that the vendor provides, as well as the FMC events connection, did not show any of those connections because there was not a NAT inbound which said either allow it or deny it.""I was just trying to learn how this product actually operates and one thing that I see from internal processing is it does fire-walling and then sends it to the IPS model and any other model that needs to be performed. For example, content checking or filtering will be done in a field processing manner. That is something that causes delays in the network, from a security perspective. That is something that can be improved upon. Palo Alto already has implemented this as a pilot passed processing. So they put the same stream of data across multiple modules at the same time and see if it is giving a positive result by using an XR function. So, something similar can be done in the Cisco Firepower. Instead of single processing or in a sequential manner, they can do something similar to pile processing. Internal function that is something that they can improve upon.""The product line does not address the SMB market as it is supposed to do. Cisco already has an on-premises sandbox solution.""The central management tool is not comfortable to use. You need to have a specific skill set. This is an important improvement for management because I would like to log into Firepower, see the dashboard, and generate a real-time report, then I question my team."

More Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall Cons »

"This solution is not mature when it comes to handling perimeter traffic like internet browsing.""We find it's different implementing it region-to-region. It might help if it was universal across all regions.""The product could be made more customizable.""The solution doesn't offer the same capabilities of Fortinet. It should offer intrusion prevention and advance filtering. These are two very useful features offered on Fortinet that Azure lacks.""The interface could be improved, it's not very user friendly.""There are a number of things that need to be simplified, but it's mostly costs. It needs to be simplified because it's pretty expensive.""Currently, it only supports IP addresses, so you have to be specific about the IPs that are in your environment.""Azure should be able to work better as a balancer also, instead of just being a firewall. It should have a wider mandate."

More Azure Firewall Cons »

"Management can be improved in Meraki MX.""The security is not as strong as it could be""From the improvement perspective, we need more monitoring capabilities. We want to have full-based access visibility, such as, what is happening when something is trying to reach and it is denying. We cannot see some parts of it. The integration of active directory with this product is not very fruitful. It has some bugs or lacks in the functionality of active directory integration. We are unable to identify where exactly and whether it has really applied our policy.""Meraki tech support staff have a lot more visibility into your network than you do, which is frustrating at times. I understand the approach is to keep the dashboard easier to understand. This will frustrate more advanced users at times.​""In the next release, because the security is pretty basic, I think they could include additional security features.""In general, the SD-WAN feature needs to be improved. The load sharing and load balancing of the traffic should be improved. I have had some problems with these features in the past.""As far as what needs to be improved — nothing really comes to mind. It does what we need it to do.""You can only have one tunnel in the whole infrastructure — one tunnel with one device."

More Meraki MX Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"Our subscription costs, just for the firewalls, is between $400,000 and $500,000 a year.""Cisco's pricing is high, at times, for what they provide.""The one-time cost is affordable, but the maintenance cost and the Smart Net costs need to be reduced. They're too high.""We normally license on a yearly basis. The hardware procurement cost should be considered. If you're virtual maybe that cost is eradicated and just the licensing cost is applied. If you have hardware the cost must be covered by you. All the shipping charges will be paid by you also. I don't thing there are any other hidden charges though.""Cisco pricing is premium. However, they gave us a 50 to 60 percent discount.""There are additional implementation and validation costs.""Cisco, as we all know, is expensive, but for the money you are paying, you know that you are also getting top-notch documentation as well as support if needed.""This product requires licenses for advanced features including Snort, IPS, and malware detection."

More Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Azure Firewall is more expensive. If Microsoft can make Azure Firewall cheaper, I can see that all clients will think of using it. One client used FortiGate because it is much cheaper. Some clients ask me for Cisco, but in the cloud estimate, I found its cost is the same as Azure Firewall.""Azure Firewall is quite an expensive product.""The licensing module is good."

More Azure Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice »

"The price varies depending on the hardware platform as well as the type of license and whether you're adding security or not.""The license cost depends on the box. We acquired a different product line. We are dealing with MX appliance now, that is, MX6, MX54, MX100, MX250, MX450. Every box has got an identity, and it has got its own specification. Every box has got a different license fee. We deployed Meraki MX in UAE when it was not a mature product. We took a risk, but we were successful. We saved a huge amount of money after implementing and removing all the MPLS and leased lines. We got a broadband connection because Meraki MX could work on a broadband connection. We have drastically saved a very good amount of money, which was one of the successful things apart from the successful solution.""​Other content filtering solutions that I have used had more bells and whistles, but given the cost, complexity, and management overhead, I am very pleased with Meraki’s solution.""The price is slightly increased, but reasonable.""It is a good global solution in terms of the price and features, but because we sell this solution in dollars, sometimes we don't get to sell this solution in Brazil because the dollar is very expensive. The price of every project is different. It varies depending upon the project, scenario, and client.""The pricing could always be improved — especially with the shape the economy is in at the moment.""Meraki is the best option — based on the price and the features available.""Its licensing cost could be better."

More Meraki MX Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Firewalls solutions are best for your needs.
534,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer:  When you compare these firewalls you can identify them with different features, advantages, practices and… more »
Top Answer: Pick a product model for both vendors: Cisco & Palo Alto (refer to technical data sheets and whitepapers --)  See the… more »
Top Answer: Cisco Firepower is NGFW, and ASA is the older Cisco firewall.
Top Answer: Azure Firewall Vs. Palo Alto Network NG Firewalls Both solutions provide stellar stability and security. Azure… more »
Top Answer: I like its order management feature. It doesn't have the kind of threat intelligence that Palo Alto has, but the order… more »
Top Answer: The threat intelligence part could be better. I don't see why our customers have to get an additional solution with… more »
Top Answer: definitely the FortiGate , I can assist you with configuration and support if needed .
Top Answer: The technical support people from Meraki are brilliant.
Top Answer: The price could be lower, but compared to the TCO of other products, it's not really that expensive. When we sell it to… more »
Comparisons
Also Known As
Cisco Firepower NGFW, Cisco Firepower Next-Generation Firewall, FirePOWER, Cisco NGFWv
MX64, MX64W, MX84, MX100, MX400, MX600
Learn More
Overview

Cisco NGFW firewalls deliver advanced threat defense capabilities to meet diverse needs, from
small/branch offices to high performance data centers and service providers. Available in a wide
range of models, Cisco NGFW can be deployed as a physical or virtual appliance. Advanced threat
defense capabilities include Next-generation IPS (NGIPS), Security Intelligence (SI), Advanced
Malware Protection (AMP), URL filtering, Application Visibility and Control (AVC), and flexible VPN
features. Inspect encrypted traffic and enjoy automated risk ranking and impact flags to reduce event
volume so you can quickly prioritize threats. Cisco NGFW firewalls are also available with clustering
for increased performance, high availability configurations, and more.
Cisco Firepower NGFWv is the virtualized version of Cisco's Firepower NGFW firewall. Widely
deployed in leading private and public clouds, Cisco NGFWv automatically scales up/down to meet
the needs of dynamic cloud environments and high availability provides resilience. Also, Cisco NGFWv
can deliver micro-segmentation to protect east-west network traffic.
Cisco firewalls provide consistent security policies, enforcement, and protection across all your
environments. Unified management for Cisco ASA and FTD/NGFW physical and virtual firewalls is
delivered by Cisco Defense Orchestrator (CDO), with cloud logging also available. And with Cisco
SecureX included with every Cisco firewall, you gain a cloud-native platform experience that enables
greater simplicity, visibility, and efficiency.
Learn more about Cisco’s firewall solutions, including virtual appliances for public and private cloud.

Azure Firewall is a managed, cloud-based network security service that protects your Azure Virtual Network resources. It is a fully stateful firewall as a service with built-in high availability and unrestricted cloud scalability.

With the proliferation of modern applications and mixed-use networks, host and port based security is no longer sufficient. Cisco Meraki's layer 7 "next generation" firewall, included in MX security appliances and every wireless AP, gives administrators complete control over the users, content, and applications on their network.
Offer
Learn more about Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall
Learn more about Azure Firewall
Learn more about Meraki MX
Sample Customers
Rackspace, The French Laundry, Downer Group, Lewisville School District, Shawnee Mission School District, Lower Austria Firefighters Administration, Oxford Hospital, SugarCreek, Westfield
Information Not Available
Hyatt, ONS
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider22%
Financial Services Firm16%
Manufacturing Company8%
Non Profit8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider34%
Computer Software Company21%
Government7%
Financial Services Firm3%
REVIEWERS
Computer Software Company30%
Manufacturing Company20%
Financial Services Firm20%
Government10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider21%
Government5%
Energy/Utilities Company5%
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider31%
Financial Services Firm13%
Pharma/Biotech Company13%
Non Tech Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider29%
Computer Software Company20%
Construction Company4%
Government4%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business43%
Midsize Enterprise28%
Large Enterprise29%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business13%
Midsize Enterprise12%
Large Enterprise74%
REVIEWERS
Small Business33%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise47%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business16%
Midsize Enterprise14%
Large Enterprise70%
REVIEWERS
Small Business56%
Midsize Enterprise23%
Large Enterprise21%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business42%
Midsize Enterprise18%
Large Enterprise40%
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Firewall vs. Meraki MX and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
534,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Azure Firewall is ranked 19th in Firewalls with 14 reviews while Meraki MX is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 16 reviews. Azure Firewall is rated 7.4, while Meraki MX is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Azure Firewall writes "Good value for your money, good URL filtering, supports intrusion prevention, and is stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Makes it easy to stay on top of everything for security". Azure Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks VM-Series, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Check Point NGFW and Check Point CloudGuard Network Security, whereas Meraki MX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall NSa and Zscaler Internet Access. See our Azure Firewall vs. Meraki MX report.

We monitor all Firewalls 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.