We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks WildFire and Proofpoint Email Protection based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Proofpoint has an edge over WildFire in this comparison. Compared with WildFire, it is easier to set up and has a proven ROI.
"The backup is the best feature."
"What I like about Palo Alto is that it is a complete product, with everything in it."
"The most valuable features of this solution are sandbox capabilities."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten since we never faced any issues."
"Scalable ATP solution that's quick to set up. It demonstrates good performance and stability."
"The most valuable feature is the Automatic Verdict, to recognize whether something is a threat, or not."
"It is the best device in comparison to other network products in the marketplace."
"Installing this product as a datacenter firewall for segregation and segmentation, and also configuring policies between zones has improved my organization."
"It's very good at identifying threats."
"The solution scales quite well."
"They have customized security rules, mature rules, anti-virus protection, as well as email authentication similar to SPF, DKIM, and DMARC."
"There is no downtime."
"The solution scales well."
"The most valuable feature of Proofpoint Email Protection is the dashboards and their visibility, easy configuration, and artificial intelligence. Additionally, the reports are very important and helpful."
"Its anti-phishing functionality is the most valuable. Certainly, the biggest problem I have is phishing."
"The Phish Alarm button allows users to submit questionable emails for review and complete analysis."
"The global product feature needs improvement, the VPN, and we need some enhanced features."
"The size of Palo Alto's cloud is big but it could be easier to use from a product management perspective."
"I would like to see them continue on their developmental roadmap for the product."
"In the future, Palo Alto could reduce the time it takes to process the file."
"In terms of what I'd like to see in the next release of Palo Alto Networks WildFire, each release is based on malware that has been identified. The key problem is an average of six months from the time malware is written to the time it's discovered and a signature is created for it. The only advice that I can give is for them to shorten that timeframe. I don't know how they would do it, but if they shorten that, for example, cut it in half, they'll make themselves more famous."
"I think it would be nice for Palo Alto to work without the connection to the cloud. It is 100% powerful when connected to the cloud. But, if you disconnect from the cloud, you only get 40-50% power."
"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 free version does not have real-time updates. It is slow."
"The reporting section could be enhanced. I like some reports but if they could allow us to create custom reports with more flexibility it would enhance the reports more."
"They do not have an on-demand scan for the internal viruses and internal users, and they don't have a scan for the exchange server against viruses and spam as Symantec does."
"Proofpoint Email Protection's interface is confusing and could be improved."
"The solution should add post-sales training."
"There is room for improvement in detecting and preventing phishing attacks. While the solution performs well in some aspects, it struggles with phishing threats."
"Some use cases haven't been dealt with yet."
"Integration and filtering out who you want and don't want to have integrated ID could be improved."
"Proofpoint Email Protection has a new approach to email security with its API feature. Currently, it only works with Office 365. In the future, it would be beneficial if it also works with Gmail, as Check Point is currently the only brand that has API email security for Gmail. It would be beneficial if Proofpoint Email Protection could add this integration, they would be more competitive with other vendors."
Palo Alto Networks WildFire is ranked 3rd in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 58 reviews while Proofpoint Email Protection is ranked 1st in Secure Email Gateway (SEG) with 46 reviews. Palo Alto Networks WildFire is rated 8.4, while Proofpoint Email Protection 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 Proofpoint Email Protection writes "A reasonably priced product that offers protection to emails, along with spam filters". Palo Alto Networks WildFire is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Fortinet FortiSandbox and Check Point SandBlast Network, whereas Proofpoint Email Protection is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Office 365, Microsoft Exchange Online Protection (EOP), Cisco Secure Email, Fortinet FortiMail and KnowBe4.
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.