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

Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs Zscaler Internet Access comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
6.5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire provides cost-effective, centralized threat management, reducing security costs and improving efficiency in high-threat environments.
Sentiment score
6.5
Organizations using Zscaler Internet Access see cost reductions and improved security, achieving significant ROI within months.
The service generates a low rate of false positives, reducing the overhead of managing false positive events.
The managed service aspect of Zscaler Internet Access has allowed for reduced staffing costs, resulting in a saving of approximately 20-25% compared to prior expenses.
 

Customer Service

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.
Sentiment score
6.8
Zscaler Internet Access support is praised for technical expertise but needs improved consistency and availability, with ratings around 7-8/10.
There is a lack of SLA adherence, and third-party partners do not provide prompt responses.
The support is quite difficult to access promptly.
The service response times are aligned with standards, responding within a few hours based on the problem's criticality.
The technical support for Zscaler Internet Access is rated around seven out of ten due to some response time issues and the engagement model.
I find customer support to be quite adequate
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
Palo Alto Networks WildFire efficiently scales for diverse environments, supporting thousands of users while integrating well with security modules.
Sentiment score
7.5
Zscaler Internet Access offers scalable cloud-based services, supporting large user bases despite occasional bandwidth and data center reliability issues.
Wildfire is highly scalable.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is scalable, and I give it a nine for scalability.
Zscaler Internet Access is scalable and has points of presence across the globe to ensure low latency and reliable connections.
I find Zscaler Internet Access to be highly scalable, which was one of the reasons for choosing it.
They require close to 200,000 megabits per second, and this bandwidth requirement has posed problems for both Zscaler and Netskope.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is highly rated for reliability, seamless integration, and effective network security performance without disruptions.
Sentiment score
7.3
Zscaler Internet Access is praised for stability and performance, with minor latency issues noted and quickly resolved past incidents.
It performs filtering, malware blocking, and scanning.
The solution is scalable and stable.
Zscaler Internet Access is stable and capable of building resilient architectures.
Zscaler Internet Access is very stable, and I would rate its stability as nine out of ten.
 

Room For Improvement

WildFire needs improvements in integration, user-friendliness, and pricing, along with better support, automation, and global availability.
Zscaler Internet Access needs improved integration, user interface, scalability, and lower costs, with enhanced support and security features.
The dashboard should provide better visibility, especially in showing how many files are sent to Wildfire and their findings.
There are not any negative aspects; the only issue is the price when compared to others.
The support could be improved, as it takes a while to get assistance from the vendors.
In future updates, I would like to see some of the features bundled into the existing product set, perhaps more AI features and a refreshed interface.
The response time and engagement model for technical support could be improved to handle complex outages more efficiently.
One feature I am missing is the ability to connect automatically to internal monitoring systems.
 

Setup Cost

Palo Alto WildFire offers advanced threat protection, appealing to enterprises despite its high cost, potentially deterring smaller organizations.
Zscaler Internet Access is costly but valued for features, global coverage, scalability, and suitability for large enterprises.
I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of affordability.
Zscaler Internet Access is less expensive than competitors like Palo Alto, offering a premium service justified by security enhancements and cost-effective scalability.
Zscaler Internet Access is recognized as an expensive solution.
 

Valuable Features

Palo Alto Networks WildFire automates threat analysis, excels in sandboxing, and offers robust security with cloud-based, user-friendly features.
Zscaler Internet Access enhances security with robust features, seamless integration, and efficient threat protection for remote networks.
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.
It also provides enhanced inspection capabilities, including SSL decryption, while maintaining compliance with organizational security policies.
The most valuable feature for me is the ability to see how my network and traffic looks with modules like analytics and insights.
 

Categories and Ranking

Palo Alto Networks WildFire
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (1st)
Zscaler Internet Access
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (4th), Internet Security (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Palo Alto Networks WildFire and Zscaler Internet Access aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Palo Alto Networks WildFire is designed for Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) and holds a mindshare of 11.4%, down 12.6% compared to last year.
Zscaler Internet Access, on the other hand, focuses on Secure Web Gateways (SWG), holds 14.5% mindshare, down 17.0% since last year.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
AshwaniTyagi - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers good reliability and availability to users
Sometimes, cost is one component that customers complain about, especially if they compare it with some of its competitors. Zscaler's pricing seems to be a bit on the higher side. I think the pricing model is also something that the tool can probably look into to optimize or improve for the customer so that it can be a competitive tool commercially. The solution's technical support needs to be improved, especially by offering a better support structure for different geographical areas.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 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%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
16%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
Which is the better security solution - Cisco Umbrella or Zscaler?
Cisco Umbrella and Zscaler Internet Access are two broad-spectrum Internet security solutions that I have tried. Zscaler Internet Access is a good option for carrying out multiple security functi...
Which is better, Zscaler internet access or Netsckope CASB?
We researched Netskope but ultimately chose Zscaler. Netskope is a cloud access security broker that helps identify and manage cloud applications, protecting your sensitive data from exfiltration....
 

Also Known As

No data available
ZIA
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation
Ulster-Greene ARC, BanRegio, HDFC, Ralcorp Holdings Inc., British American Tobacco, Med America Billing Services Inc., Lanco Group, Aquafil, Telefonica, Swisscom, Brigade Group
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft, Fortinet and others in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP). Updated: August 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.