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

Palo Alto Networks WildFire vs Trellix Network Detection and Response 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
7.5
Palo Alto Networks WildFire efficiently prevents threats, reduces costs significantly, and integrates seamlessly for comprehensive real-time security.
Sentiment score
8.5
Trellix Network Detection and Response exceeded expectations by improving threat prevention and detection, boosting productivity and reducing response times.
Sentiment score
7.5
Zscaler Internet Access offers cost and complexity reduction, improved security, and quick ROI, especially for SMBs, despite regional challenges.
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
7.3
Palo Alto Networks WildFire support excels for large companies, with varied quality and responsiveness for others, depending on region.
Sentiment score
6.8
Trellix's support is praised for responsiveness, but improvements in expertise and incident response promptness are suggested by some.
Sentiment score
7.1
Zscaler Internet Access support is strong and responsive, though some users seek quicker resolutions and better online resources.
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.
Technical support needs improvement as sometimes engineers are not available promptly, especially during high-severity incidents.
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 excels in adaptability, scalability, and seamless integration, meeting diverse organizational demands and high-performance standards.
Sentiment score
7.8
Trellix Network Detection and Response scales effectively in various industries, performing well in large enterprises without latency issues.
Sentiment score
7.9
Zscaler Internet Access is highly scalable, cloud-based, and supports large user volumes with positive feedback on integration and performance.
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.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.4
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is highly reliable, stable, and efficient, excelling in large-scale deployments and seamless cloud integration.
Sentiment score
7.7
Trellix Network Detection and Response is stable and reliable, with consistent performance and high user satisfaction despite occasional minor issues.
Sentiment score
7.7
Zscaler Internet Access offers stable performance globally, though regions like China and South Africa occasionally face latency challenges.
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

Palo Alto Networks WildFire needs improvements in cost, user interface, ease of deployment, integration, detection capabilities, and support efficiency.
Trellix Network Detection needs improved customization, integration, AI capabilities, support services, and a more user-friendly interface at reduced pricing.
Zscaler Internet Access needs better integration, user-friendly features, improved support, and competitive pricing to enhance user experience.
The dashboard should provide better visibility, especially in showing how many files are sent to Wildfire and their findings.
The support could be improved, as it takes a while to get assistance from the vendors.
There should be improvements in AI intelligence, faster decision-making, and a more responsive technical support team.
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 Networks WildFire is valued for advanced security despite high costs, preferred by enterprises but challenging for smaller firms.
Trellix Network Detection is costly but effective, with yearly licensing, discounts, and competitive pricing against some competitors like Palo Alto.
Zscaler Internet Access is seen as costly but premium compared to traditional solutions, offering unmatched services and global coverage.
I would rate it an eight out of ten in terms of affordability.
Zscaler Internet Access is recognized as an expensive solution.
Zscaler Internet Access is less expensive than competitors like Palo Alto, offering a premium service justified by security enhancements and cost-effective scalability.
 

Valuable Features

WildFire offers sandboxing, App-ID, and automation, excelling in threat detection with real-time updates and seamless integration.
Trellix excels in threat protection with AI-driven analysis, automation, and enhanced visibility, benefiting security operations and incident management.
Zscaler Internet Access delivers comprehensive cloud-native security with threat protection, ease of use, and centralized management for remote users.
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.
Trellix NDR provides an essential defense by automatically responding to network incidents that firewalls may not catch.
Its cloud-native proxy architecture ensures high availability and resilience, even in challenging regions like China.
The SSL inspection also offers added security, facilitating the exchange of critical data.
 

Mindshare comparison

Advanced Threat Protection (ATP)
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.
BiswabhanuPanda - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers in-depth investigation capabilities, integrates well and smoothly transitioned from a lower-capacity appliance to a higher one
The in-depth investigation capabilities are a major advantage. When the system flags something as malicious, it provides a packet capture of that activity within the environment. That helps my team quickly identify additional context that most other tools wouldn't offer – like source IP or base64 encoded data. We can also see DNS requests and other details that aren't readily available in solutions like Check Point or others that we've tried. The detection itself is solid, and their sandboxing is powerful. There's a learning curve – you need a strong grasp of OS-level changes, process forking, registry changes, and the potential impact of those. But with that knowledge, the level of information Trellix provides is far greater than what we've seen elsewhere. The real-time response capability of Trellix has been quite effective, although it's not very fast. The key is this solution's concept of 'preference zero.' They don't immediately act on a zero-day. For example, the solution has seen a piece of malware for the first time. It'll let it in, then do sandboxing. Maybe after four or five minutes, it identifies that specific file's DNX Secure Store as malicious. At that point, they update the static analysis engine, and it gets detected if anything else tries to download the same file. There is that initial 'preference zero' concept, like with Panda. You may not hold traffic in the network. That's standard in the industry; we don't do much about it. To address that, we also have endpoint solutions. We use SentinelOne in our environment, which helps us identify threats like Western Bureaus and others.
ShanavasVK - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps maintain a consistent posture of internet security while getting rid of VPN and hovering into zero trust
There could be a better way for the tool to categorize the traffic. For example, the tool does exceptions and everything overall. If I want to give guest access or provide access to guest users or any other internet access and if it does not go through the SSL inspection because, in our company, we can't have the root certificate on a device that we don't manage, which can be called out as an exception or an exclusion, but that doesn't provide a proper reflection of the picture of what is happening in the environment. There are granularities bringing it down. The tool I used or still have is Zscaler Cloud Connector to protect the cloud environment, which can have a bit more user-friendly installation and setup, and it would help a lot. The deployment process of Zscaler Cloud Connector needs to be more user-friendly. Improvements are required in the exception category. For example, suppose I report on a monthly basis what the breaches and traffic violating the SSL inspection area are coming from. In that case, I may find that half of them may be coming through some guest network, meaning the tool doesn't differentiate between the guest or normal networks or the corporate networks. Having options to differentiate different networks would be ideal so that it can show a true picture of things to users, as half of the things in the tool are not in our control and are not of our concern.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions are best for your needs.
856,856 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
16%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
15%
Educational Organization
14%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

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 conside...
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...
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 advan...
What do you like most about FireEye Network Security?
We wanted to cross-reference that activity with the network traffic just to be sure there was no lateral movement. Wi...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FireEye Network Security?
While I do not handle pricing directly, it is known that there is a variety of customers with different licensing nee...
What needs improvement with FireEye Network Security?
The Trellix solution could be improved by enhancing the Central Management Console for faster visibility, which would...
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. Zs...
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 ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
FireEye Network Security, FireEye
ZIA
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Novamedia, Nexon Asia Pacific, Lenovo, Samsonite, IOOF, Sinogrid, SanDisk Corporation
FFRDC, Finansbank, Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Investis, Kelsey-Seybold Clinic, Bank of Thailand, City of Miramar, Citizens National Bank, D-Wave Systems
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: June 2025.
856,856 professionals have used our research since 2012.