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

Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs Palo Alto Networks WildFire comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 1, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.3
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series boosts agility, efficiency, security, and ROI, with significant cost-effective satisfaction and improved data visibility.
Sentiment score
6.5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire provides cost-effective, centralized threat management, reducing security costs and improving efficiency in high-threat environments.
Customers can see data within a week, indicating a quick return on investment.
The service generates a low rate of false positives, reducing the overhead of managing false positive events.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.5
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series has responsive, knowledgeable support, though communication issues and high premium costs are noted by users.
Sentiment score
7.0
Palo Alto Networks WildFire's support is responsive and expert but varies in availability and response time, especially for smaller companies.
The support quality could be improved.
Resolving issues promptly.
They are responsive and provide high-quality assistance.
There is a lack of SLA adherence, and third-party partners do not provide prompt responses.
The service response times are aligned with standards, responding within a few hours based on the problem's criticality.
The support is quite difficult to access promptly.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series offers high scalability and adaptability, with some configuration challenges but generally positive user experiences.
Sentiment score
8.2
Palo Alto Networks WildFire efficiently scales for diverse environments, supporting thousands of users while integrating well with security modules.
They are easy to upgrade, and with credit licensing, they scale effectively according to demand.
The solution is scalable and can easily handle an increase in the number of users.
It is easy to use with an excellent graphical user interface and extensive documentation, which contributes to its high scalability.
Wildfire is highly scalable.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is scalable, and I give it a nine for scalability.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.1
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is highly stable, with minor issues during updates, making it a robust choice for users.
Sentiment score
8.5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is highly rated for reliability, seamless integration, and effective network security performance without disruptions.
Hardware is generally very stable.
I have not experienced any major problems or downtime.
Perfection is unlikely as the dynamic nature of traffic and constant changes can result in occasional bugs despite regular updates.
It performs filtering, malware blocking, and scanning.
The solution is scalable and stable.
 

Room For Improvement

Palo Alto Networks VM-Series needs UI, reporting, integration, cloud compatibility, scalable features, clear pricing, and enhanced AI capabilities.
WildFire needs improvements in integration, user-friendliness, and pricing, along with better support, automation, and global availability.
Integration with CSIRT across all use levels would make it easier for administrators to stay updated on the blocked entities without manual intervention.
Most customers go for partner-enabled support, which involves multiple layers, leading to delays.
When managing the firewall, it involves a Strata Cloud web browser that requires improvement to enhance deployment ease and call center efficiency.
The dashboard should provide better visibility, especially in showing how many files are sent to Wildfire and their findings.
It is a very good product.
The support could be improved, as it takes a while to get assistance from the vendors.
 

Setup Cost

Palo Alto Networks VM-Series offers robust security and flexible pricing but requires careful licensing for cost-effectiveness.
Palo Alto WildFire offers advanced threat protection, appealing to enterprises despite its high cost, potentially deterring smaller organizations.
Palo Alto is expensive in terms of pricing, particularly when comparing features to cost.
The cost involves purchasing through a vendor, which might mark up due to the supply chain.
Pricing for Palo Alto Networks is higher than other OEMs, but considering the robustness and features, it gains customer trust.
I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of affordability.
 

Valuable Features

Palo Alto Networks VM-Series offers advanced threat management, scalability, and security for cloud and data center environments with intuitive features.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire automates threat analysis, excels in sandboxing, and offers robust security with cloud-based, user-friendly features.
We use these tools to prevent all known and unknown threats using Palo Alto Networks' Wildfire and other data filtering tools to gather information, analyze traffic, manage malicious traffic, and offer visibility, control, and attack prevention.
Palo Alto's robust threat intelligence supports new updates, and I can open cases directly with their Threat Intelligence team.
The DNS security significantly enhances security through visibility and detection, allowing control over crucial traffic like DNS, which is often exploited by ransomware.
Integrating Palo Alto Networks WildFire with various security protocols similar to a firewall has significantly improved the overall threat detection capabilities in our organization.
The most valuable feature of Wildfire is its sandboxing capability for examining suspicious files or locations.
 

Categories and Ranking

Palo Alto Networks VM-Series
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
65
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (12th)
Palo Alto Networks WildFire
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is 2.7%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks WildFire is 11.4%, down from 12.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

RonnieYazdani - PeerSpot reviewer
User-friendly CLI and efficient dashboard streamline operations with robust security features
I find Palo Alto Networks VM-Series easy to deploy, and none of my customers have had significant complaints. My customers have high certifications provided by Palo Alto Networks. The friendly dashboard and the ability to easily command and use the CLI make Palo Alto Networks VM-Series a better product. It offers robust solutions, making it valuable to my customers.
AjayKumar17 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhanced cybersecurity with advanced sandboxing and effective in controlling DNS issues
Improvements are needed in the UI part. The dashboard should provide better visibility, especially in showing how many files are sent to Wildfire and their findings. This information should be integrated with the Dashboard so that system admins can see what is happening. Furthermore, technical support needs a lot of improvement, particularly in terms of responsiveness and adhering to service level agreements.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user206346 - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 11, 2015
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto Networks
Cisco ASA vs. Palo Alto: Management Goodies You often have comparisons of both firewalls concerning security components. Of course, a firewall must block attacks, scan for viruses, build VPNs, etc. However, in this post I am discussing the advantages and disadvantages from both vendors concerning…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
University
6%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Features comparison between Palo Alto and Fortinet firewalls
In the best tradition of these questions, Feature-wise both are quite similar, but each has things it's better at, it kind of depends what you value most. PA is good at app control, web filtering a...
How does Azure Firewall compare with Palo Alto Networks VM Series?
Both products are very stable and easily scalable. The setup of Azure Firewall is easy and very user-friendly and the overall cost is reasonable. Azure Firewall offers a solid threat awareness, can...
How does Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall compare with Palo Alto Networks Wildfire?
The Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall is a very powerful and very complex piece of anti-viral software. When one considers that fact, it is all the more impressive that the setup is a fairly straightf...
Which is better - Wildfire or FortiGate?
FortiGate has a lot going for it and I consider it to be the best, most user-friendly firewall out there. What I like the most about it is that it has an attractive web dashboard with very easy nav...
How does Cisco ASA Firewall compare with Palo Alto's WildFire?
When looking to change our ASA Firewall, we looked into Palo Alto’s WildFire. It works especially in preventing advanced malware and zero-day exploits with real-time intelligence. The sandbox featu...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Warren Rogers Associates
Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks VM-Series vs. Palo Alto Networks WildFire and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.