Compare Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs. Sophos UTM
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros | |
"It helps us when segmenting and securing the network and all sort of technologies, all sort of next generation needs. It's next generation phases of firewall like anti-virus, sandboxing, wifi, and VPN." "They have many different options with Palo Alto WildFire and the set-up is quick. If you have all the details in hand, it does not take more than 15 minutes to deploy a firewall." "The most valuable feature is the Automatic Verdict, to recognize whether something is a threat, or not." "The way that the solution quickly updates to adjust to threats is the solution's most valuable aspect. When there's a security attack, within five minutes, all Wildfire subscribers have access to updates so that all systems will be safe. Its threat prevention is way better than other vendor products." "Using WildFire has reduced the number of viruses and the amount of malware that comes into our system, which means that I don't have to rely on the end-users to identify it." "The most valuable feature for us is the VPN." "For example, if a security Intel threat talks about an IOC. We can then go to our MSP and say, "Is there a signature for this particular type of malware that just came out?" And if they'll say yes, then we'll say, "Okay. Does it apply to these firewalls? And have we seen any hits on it?" There's absolutely value in it." "The technical support is good." | "Sophos UTM has improved the porting section. It has improved security by seeing the gaps. For example, when you discover that an entry has been using a certain application, with Sophos UTM acting as a Layer 7 firewall, you can block the application, not the port." "The features that I've known to be most valuable are both the web security features as well as the web firewall capabilities. As a partner of Sophos firewall, we have some clients and they are using Sophos firewall UTM and we are using it as well." "Configuration troubleshooting is eased by the use of the color-coded, live firewall log." "It allows me to easily connect with more than forty-five remote sites and more than fifty remote users between IPsec and SSL VPN, applying the web filter and application filter to ensure a secure connection." "We find all of the features valuable because together they fit the needs of our customers." "I would recommend UTM over XG because it's easier to manage." "It is a very good product. The threat monitoring process is the most valuable feature." "It is easy to manage." |
Cons | |
"Other vendors have some sort of bandwidth management built into the firewall itself and Palo Alto is missing that." "There are certain changes that I was expecting in the previous version, and I hope that they are soon fixed. All of the problems that I have faced so far have been resolved." "I would like to see them continue on their developmental roadmap for the product." "The size of Palo Alto's cloud is big but it could be easier to use from a product management perspective." "It would be nice if there was an easier way to install and deploy it, such as through the inclusion of wizards." "When you contact support, there is no guarantee that they will be available to help you tackle the issue that you are facing." "It's not really their problem, it's a problem across the board. There will always be problems with interrupted traffic. We have to set it up where we're playing a middle man game where we're stripping it out, looking at it, and then putting it back together and sending it on its way. That requires CPU cycles. And there's some overhead with that." "The deployment model could be better." | "With Sophos UTM, there is a general rule in the firewall when the country blocking can block some countries from accessing your data. In the current version, you still need to add it by putting in the IP range. This feature would be helpful for administrators and it gives them the advantage to block stuff in less time." "The only time we face a problem or issues is when we place a ticket. We have found that response is very slow." "Support for IKEv2 is needed in this solution." "I would like to see the SD-WAN feature improved." "We would like to have unique viewable IDs for rules and in the packet filter logfile, for easier debugging of old log files." "It's stable, but the reaction time of the GUI is terrible." "Sophos should be more user-friendly, have more dashboards, and an easier implementation." "The five-factor authentication needs improvement." |
Pricing and Cost Advice | |
"It's pretty expensive but with respect to value for money, it's okay." "The licensing fees are on an annual basis, and there are no costs in addition to the standard fees." "We pay between $3,000 and $4,000 CAD ($2,200 - $3,000 USD) per year to maintain this solution." "This solution is very pricey and it depends on the package that you implement." "I think they should lower the price of this solution" "The pricing is highly expensive." "This is an expensive product and the market for Palo Alto in Poland could be much bigger if the pricing was comparable to Fortinet." | "This solution is less expensive than FortiGate." "It is the cheapest product available. It's good if you have a low budget." "We pay for the service on a yearly basis. The last time we paid was in June, for a year. At the time, it was about $20,000." "Our licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis." "It's reasonably priced." |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection solutions are best for your needs. 456,719 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |
Questions from the Community | |
Top Answer: The way that the solution quickly updates to adjust to threats is the solution's most valuable aspect. When there's a security attack, within five minutes, all Wildfire subscribers have access to… more » Top Answer: The pricing of the solution is a bit higher, but it's worth the extra money you will spend because of the protection that you get. Top Answer: In terms of threat prevention capabilities, the solution doesn't need any improvements that I can see. We've been quite satisfied. The size of Palo Alto's cloud is big but it could be easier to use… more » | Top Answer: In my opinion and as a result of years of experience:
- Both are great firewalls with excellent performance and a useful integration witch Active directory and LDAP
- Fortinet is easier to… more » Top Answer: One other big difference is that pfSense is FreeBSD based while Sophos UTM is linux based. It is also worth having a lool on cacheguard which is a proxy oriented product and also Linux based. |
Ranking  | |
Views 38,913 Comparisons 34,091 Reviews 10 Average Words per Review 547 Rating 8.7 | Views 56,032 Comparisons 45,869 Reviews 18 Average Words per Review 474 Rating 8.7 |
Popular Comparisons | |
 Compared 20% of the time.  Compared 13% of the time. Compared 8% of the time.  Compared 8% of the time.  Compared 2% of the time. |  Compared 26% of the time. Compared 24% of the time. Compared 10% of the time.  Compared 7% of the time.  Compared 2% of the time. |
Also Known As | |
| Astaro | |
Learn | |
| Palo Alto Networks | Sophos |
Overview | |
| WildFire™ cloud-based threat analysis service is the industry’s most advanced analysis and prevention engine for highly evasive zero-day exploits and malware. The cloud-based service employs a unique multi-technique approach combining dynamic and static analysis, innovative machine learning techniques, and a groundbreaking bare metal analysis environment to detect and prevent even the most evasive threats. | The global network of highly skilled researchers and analysts, protecting businesses from known and emerging malware - viruses, rootkits and spyware. |
Offer | |
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks WildFire | Learn more about Sophos UTM |
Sample Customers | |
| Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation | One Housing Group |
Top Industries | |
Comms Service Provider21% Retailer14% Government14% Financial Services Firm7% Comms Service Provider25% Computer Software Company25% Government6% Media Company4% | Manufacturing Company17% Comms Service Provider9% Financial Services Firm9% Retailer9% Comms Service Provider37% Computer Software Company19% Media Company6% Government4% |
Company Size | |
Small Business50% Midsize Enterprise9% Large Enterprise41% Small Business17% Midsize Enterprise19% Large Enterprise65% | Small Business59% Midsize Enterprise24% Large Enterprise17% Small Business49% Midsize Enterprise38% Large Enterprise13% |
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, FireEye, Check Point and others in Advanced Threat Protection. Updated: January 2021.
456,719 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 1st in Advanced Threat Protection with 11 reviews while Sophos UTM is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 15 reviews. Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.8, while Sophos UTM is rated 8.6. 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 "Has a solid state hard drive and can boot in less than sixty seconds". Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall, Cisco ASA Firewall, Zscaler Internet Access and Sophos XG, whereas Sophos UTM is most compared with pfSense, Fortinet FortiGate, Sophos XG, OPNsense and WatchGuard Firebox.
See our list of .
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection 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.