We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks WildFire and Sophos UTM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Palo Alto Networks, ESET and others in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)."It is the best device in comparison to other network products in the marketplace."
"I love the idea of Palo Alto Networks WildFire. It's more geared toward preventing malware. If someone's laptop or phone is malware-infected, the tool prevents it from uploading valuable corporate data outside the corporate network. That's what I love about Palo Alto Networks WildFire. It stops malware in its tracks."
"High availability with active-active and active-passive modes."
"The solution has plenty of features."
"Stability is never a concern."
"It has a user-friendly interface."
"Remote access is excellent."
"A good tool for file scanning and email threat detection, especially when it comes to attachments and communications."
"It is easy to manage."
"Technical support is very responsive."
"The most valuable feature of Sophos UTM is the endpoint protection feature."
"The most valuable features of the solution are application filtering and web filtering."
"The scalability is good."
"It helped to connect our satellite offices to the main Amazon infrastructure in a circular way."
"Scaling out cannot be easier, as there are many migration paths."
"The most valuable features of Sophos UTM are the ease of use, it is very user-friendly. You can understand what they implement in the new firmware, and it's easy to manage the firewalls."
"The cyber security visibility and forensics features to receive more information about incidents could improve in Palo Alto Networks WildFire."
"Management and web filtering can be improved. There should also be better reporting, particularly around web filtering."
"The only complaint that we receive from our customers is in regards to the price."
"Palo Alto Networks WildFire could improve by adding support for manual submission of suspicious files and URLs. Additionally, it would be an advantage to add rule-based analysis. Currently, it uses only static and AI. We need to be able to analyze archive files."
"Our main concern is that everything has to be synced with the WildFire Cloud and has to be checked through the subscription."
"The product fails to offer protection when dealing with high-severity vulnerabilities, making it an area of concern where improvements are required."
"They should make their user interface a little more user-friendly."
"The initial setup was complex."
"The ease of use could be a bit better."
"Sophos UTM's internet security could be better."
"I don't really have any notes for improvements."
"Updates come out agonizingly slowly, a trickle."
"The reporting could be a lot better."
"I didn't like it much. It suits only small businesses. It isn't scalable and reliable. There is a very critical issue with the power supply."
"This product could use some improvement with web filtering. It takes a lot of time and effort to set up and maintain."
"Sophos UTM sometimes falls short in high-availability environments. They used to launch firmware that didn't work very well in a high-availability environment."
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews while Sophos UTM is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 110 reviews. Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4, while Sophos UTM is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks WildFire writes "Good technical support and provides automatic analysis that saves us time in filtering email". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos UTM writes "It's a highly stable platform with very few hardware issues". Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Proofpoint Email Protection, Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Fortinet FortiSandbox, whereas Sophos UTM is most compared with Netgate pfSense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, OPNsense and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.