No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Kaspersky Security for Inte...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
29th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Email Security (27th), Anti-Malware Tools (35th), Secure Email Gateway (SEG) (10th)
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
12th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
66
Ranking in other categories
Firewalls (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is 0.1%. The mindshare of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is 2.4%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Palo Alto Networks VM-Series2.4%
Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway0.1%
Other97.5%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2736225 - PeerSpot reviewer
Program Manager at a hospitality company with 51-200 employees
Effective threat protection with room for cost and usability improvements
There are some drawbacks that I would mention. To be frank, enterprises always look for cost benefits, so Kaspersky could implement some price benefits. Additionally, regarding know-how, if I am an experienced person it's fine, but when someone novice is working with it, they need information about why certain actions are required. Security is a field that is very vast, and implications are not known to everyone. In future updates, a quick walk-through and know-how features would be beneficial, such as information text at relevant places. This will increase usability. Feature-wise, an impact analysis would be a really good addition.
MuhammadNadeem - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Network Engineer at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
Has supported urgent deployments and enabled inline threat protection but pricing and features could be more flexible
I am not using Palo Alto Networks VM-Series mostly, but based on my experience, there are some deficiencies in Palo Alto Networks VM-Series. Having those features missing, we are not proposing Palo Alto Networks VM-Series to all customers. However, for urgency and for some solutions that customers need for some of their other sites and subdivisions, we are providing the same.

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 the solution are the antivirus and child protection features."
"Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway has positively impacted our organization by helping us control unwanted attacks and limiting our exposure to risks."
"When it comes to threat detection, it is very strict with file downloads and uploads. It sends reports and quarantines suspicious files."
"The scalability of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is very good."
"The most valuable aspect for me is the user-friendly interface."
"The most valuable feature of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is the antivirus."
"The password thing is very good, and the overall URL protection."
"I would recommend it to others as it's easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is that you can control your traffic flowing out and coming it, allowing you to apply malware and threat protection, as well as vulnerability checks."
"Everything from Palo Alto is good and I recommend that people implement this firewall."
"In terms of security breaches, the product aids in categorizing and monitoring traffic, allowing for the identification of potentially malicisous or incorrectly formatted applications."
"Palo Alto is easy to use. The UI is very easy to understand and does not require any certification or highly skilled technician to handle the firewall. It is very user-friendly and straightforward out of the box."
"It provides complete security posture from end-to-end. This has given us better visibility into what our security aspects are."
"The most valuable feature is the Posture Assessment."
"The filtering feature is good."
"It has the ability to create Palo Alto VM-series using software."
 

Cons

"The initial setup of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is complex. The full deployment took approximately two weeks."
"I believe the absence of a procedure is the main issue."
"There is room for improvement in terms of the pricing."
"When I do a configuration, I do not know what implication it will have downstream."
"It might be helpful to have notifications on mobile devices, especially if the same browser profile is used on both mobile and laptop."
"In different locations, they're priced differently, but that's mainly marketing rather than the product features."
"The initial setup of Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway is complex. The full deployment took approximately two weeks."
"The customer support of the product is an area with shortcomings where improvements are required."
"The performance of VM instances has some limitations in terms of threshold and throughput compared to appliances."
"Palo Alto is really bad when it comes to technical support."
"The solution needs to improve its visibility. It's not straightforward to use. Understanding the policies, authorizations, and initializing features requires careful review. The product needs to offer proper training."
"The flexible throughput in Palo Alto Networks VM-Series can be improved"
"The product needs improvement in their Secure Access Service Edge."
"From time to time, they have released some content updates that have some issues, maybe twice a year."
"When managing the firewall, it involves a Strata Cloud web browser that requires improvement to enhance deployment ease and call center efficiency."
"The interface is all Java-based. I would prefer an HTML5 interface."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, and ten is very expensive."
"I am okay with the pricing."
"It is expensive."
"Personal computer licenses can be expensive if you were to scale the solution extensively. However, large companies will most likely use Endpoint solutions and not this one."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with ten being very expensive and one being cheap. It's neither too cheap nor too expensive."
"The cost is relatively high, and as a licensed product, there are restrictions on the number of users permitted per license."
"​The licensing is pretty much like everyone else."
"It is a little bit of crazy if you compare it to Vanguard, Sophos, or even Cisco. The newest version of Cisco, the Next-Generation Firewall of Cisco, is less expensive than Palo Alto. It is more comparable to Check Point."
"The pricing and licensing of this product on AWS for a three-year commitment is a great deal, if you can plan that far ahead."
"Purchasing on the AWS Marketplace was simple, effective, and easy."
"I rate Palo Alto Networks VM-Series pricing an eight out of ten."
"Do not buy larges box if you do not need them. Rightsizing is a great task to do before​hand."
"The price of this solution is very high for some parts of Africa, which makes it a challenge."
"Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is the most expensive tool among competitors"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
16%
Computer Software Company
16%
Pharma/Biotech Company
11%
University
8%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business31
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise24
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway?
Regarding pricing, I'll be exactly on the brink, neither for it nor against it because being a small company, it's a slightly pricey solution. However, considering the advantages they bring, we are...
What is your primary use case for Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway?
We work with a cloud solution. The product that we use is developed as a SaaS model. In this case, we work with AWS as our cloud provider. We use a public cloud. The tool is good, but they need to ...
What advice do you have for others considering Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway?
That's a very generic feedback. I would not have much information about threat intelligence metrics through Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway because I've not been monitoring it for quite som...
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...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Tael, Insolar, Goods.ru, Republic of Serbia
Warren Rogers Associates
Find out what your peers are saying about Kaspersky Security for Internet Gateway vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
894,738 professionals have used our research since 2012.