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

Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs Proofpoint Targeted Attack Protection 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

Palo Alto Networks WildFire
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
72
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Proofpoint Targeted Attack ...
Ranking in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
33rd
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) category, the mindshare of Palo Alto Networks WildFire is 7.5%, down from 11.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Proofpoint Targeted Attack Protection is 1.3%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Palo Alto Networks WildFire7.5%
Proofpoint Targeted Attack Protection1.3%
Other91.2%
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
 

Featured Reviews

RK
Engineer at Taalumgroup
Achieve effective threat prevention and seamless integration with powerful technical support
Integration with third-party products is possible. For example, connecting a mail gateway with Palo Alto Networks WildFire allows them to handle prevention. Palo Alto Networks WildFire is a cloud-based sandboxing solution. The firewall is connected to WildFire, and XDR performs sandboxing from the cloud. WildFire conducts malware scanning and emulation, then informs the firewall to block threats based on the response. It also generates reports regarding malware and other issues. The sandboxing process involves sending sample files to the cloud for scanning, checking file authenticity, certificates, and detecting malicious code. WildFire performs multiple checks and informs the XDR agent about file status. This automatic process occurs within minutes or seconds. For unknown or suspicious files, immediate blocking occurs while samples are sent to WildFire for identification. I rate Palo Alto Networks WildFire a 9 out of 10.
KC
Information Security Specialist at Methanex Chile SpA
Dynamic runtime engine and good protection, but needs better support and a single console
We have two to three issues per month. We contact Proofpoint's customer support for these issues. I am a major point of contact for support. If I am not able to resolve an issue, we will be reaching out to them. Proofpoint can take a couple of days to get back. I also deal with other applications from Okta and Microsoft, and we get the support within a couple of hours. There is a lot of difference between a couple of hours and a couple of days. So, Proofpoint's support should be improved. Okta and Microsoft are also able to do a Zoom or video call, but Proofpoint provides support only through email communication. Only if you request, it would be a Zoom or video session.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Stability is never a concern."
"Overall, WildFire is a good product and I recommend it."
"I love the idea of Palo Alto Networks WildFire; it's more geared toward preventing malware, and if someone's laptop or phone is malware-infected, the tool prevents it from uploading valuable corporate data outside the corporate network."
"The cloud-based services are a nice feature."
"It is an outstanding solution; it is one of the top solutions out there from what we have tested, and we have even tested Cisco Firepower."
"Using virtual settings, scalability with WildFire is awesome."
"The analysis is very fast."
"It has a user-friendly interface."
"It has a dynamic runtime engine, which gives it an advantage over Prisma that has a static engine. In Prisma, we have to do additional malware analysis, which is not required in Proofpoint."
"Proofpoint's major module is email protection, and most of the spam emails that have been directed towards our organization have been locked by Proofpoint, so we have escaped from threat hunters."
 

Cons

"The deployment model could be better."
"I would like to see them continue on their developmental roadmap for the product."
"The free version does not have real-time updates. It is slow."
"In the future, I would like to see more automation in the reporting."
"I don't think it needs to improve anything, except maybe the speed to deploy the changes."
"The only complaint that we receive from our customers is in regards to the price."
"They should make their user interface a little more user-friendly."
"The global product feature needs improvement, the VPN, and we need some enhanced features."
"We are using the TRAP console that has a Linux-based UI, which is not user-friendly."
"We are using the TRAP console that has a Linux-based UI, which is not user-friendly. The TAP console looks very advanced. Currently, we are maintaining three different consoles, and it is sometimes hard to switch between them or try to grab the data."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This solution is very pricey and it depends on the package that you implement."
"I use Palo Alto Networks WildFire's free version."
"Pricing could be improved."
"The solution is a bit expensive."
"The price is fair and comparable to other solutions."
"Palo Alto Networks solutions are typically on the higher end of pricing, but considering the value and integration with our existing infrastructure, it is worth the investment."
"The price is a bit higher than the other products such as TrendMicro, or FireEye."
"Palo Alto Networks WildFire is a product with a high price."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
885,286 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user206346 - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Consultant at Webernetz.net - Network Security Consulting
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
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business37
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise29
No data available
 

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Targeted Attack Protection
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation
Brinker Capital
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Microsoft, Proofpoint and others in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP). Updated: February 2026.
885,286 professionals have used our research since 2012.