Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad: Which is better?

If you travel abroad frequently and need a VPN to protect your data or access blocked services, choosing wisely matters. You need security, speed, privacy and ease of use. In this article, we compare two popular options for travellers: Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad VPN. Through this comparison, you’ll see what each service offers, their main differences and which suits your needs best. 

This comparison covers plans, server coverage, protocols, privacy and real-world performance. So, keep reading to make an informed decision about which VPN to choose.

Comparison table: Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad VPN

Feature analysis

Coverage and performance

Mozilla VPN

• It offers over 500 servers in 30+ countries worldwide, enabling secure connections from many common destinations.
• It uses WireGuard only, which simplifies the experience and delivers reliable, modern speeds.
• However, it can struggle with international streaming and doesn’t unblock many platforms by default.

MullVad VPN

• It provides around 690 servers in 49 countries, offering a slightly broader network than Mozilla.
• It focuses on maximum performance and privacy, delivering excellent speeds through robust, high-capacity servers.
• It will soon remove OpenVPN support to focus fully on WireGuard, strengthening performance and security.

Privacy and security

• Both VPNs apply strict no-logs policies, meaning they don’t store user activity data. This suits frequent travellers using public networks.
• Mullvad allows anonymous sign-up without email or personal details. It accepts cryptocurrency and even cash payments in some cases.
• Mozilla VPN stands out for brand transparency, external audits and built-in tracker blocking tools.

 Pricing and plans

• Mozilla VPN follows a traditional model with a higher monthly fee and a discounted annual plan.
• Mullvad keeps a low fixed monthly price, without contracts or long-term discounts. Therefore, it suits short stays or commitment-free travellers.
• Regarding guarantees, Mozilla offers 30 days, while Mullvad typically provides 14 days.

User experience and support

• Mozilla VPN feels especially beginner-friendly and suits users who value a simple app and trusted brand backing.
• Mullvad takes a more technical approach, ideal for privacy-focused users, although live support remains limited. 

Reputation and reviews of Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad VPN

At this point, Mozilla VPN and Mullvad VPN show very different profiles, although both enjoy strong reputations within the sector.

Recognition and reputation in privacy and security

Mozilla VPN benefits from the global prestige of the Mozilla Foundation, a non-profit organisation recognised for defending online privacy. Its VPN inherits this philosophy, with regular external audits, WireGuard-based code and clear communication about data management. 

Although Mozilla VPN rarely receives independent awards, its institutional backing carries weight among travellers concerned about data protection.

Mullvad VPN, meanwhile, ranks among the most respected brands in digital privacy. Specialised cybersecurity media frequently recognise it for its extreme anonymity model, allowing use without email or personal data. 

In addition, Mullvad publishes transparent security audits and actively participates in digital rights debates. Therefore, it earns strong credibility among technical users.

User reviews and expert opinions

On review platforms and specialised forums, opinions clearly reflect each service’s focus:

• Mozilla VPN receives positive ratings for ease of use, stability and brand trust. However, users criticise its smaller server network and inconsistent international streaming performance.
• Mullvad VPN achieves very high ratings for privacy, speed and business ethics. Still, some users find its interface less intuitive and unsuitable for streaming-focused needs.

Overall, perception remains clear: Mozilla VPN appeals to users seeking simplicity and trusted backing, while Mullvad VPN attracts those prioritising privacy above everything else.

Stay connected while travelling with Holafly

To use your VPN without relying on insecure public WiFi, mobile data from arrival makes a difference. For this reason, Holafly monthly plans offer a complete solution. You can share your connection across multiple devices while travelling through several destinations. 

Customer support comparison: Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad VPN

Customer support becomes highly relevant while travelling, especially when you need to resolve connection issues quickly.

Mozilla VPN provides support through forms and email. Its help centre remains well structured and available in multiple languages. However, it doesn’t offer live chat. Response times usually prove acceptable, although not immediate.

Mullvad VPN also relies on email and ticket-based support. It lacks real-time chat, yet response quality remains technically strong. Replies tend to be clear and direct, though sometimes less accessible for beginners.

Here, neither VPN delivers 24/7 live assistance. Still, Mozilla VPN feels more user-friendly, while Mullvad prioritises technical depth.

Streaming performance: Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad VPN

Access to streaming platforms ranks among the most common VPN uses during international travel.

Mozilla VPN delivers mixed results. It works intermittently with services such as Netflix or Amazon Prime Video in certain countries. However, it isn’t specifically designed to unblock regional catalogues. Platform policy changes can also affect performance.

Mullvad VPN doesn’t prioritise streaming. Although it sometimes grants access to certain catalogues, the company states it doesn’t optimise servers for this purpose. As a result, services like Netflix, Disney+ or HBO Max often detect and block connections.

If streaming matters during your trip, neither option proves ideal. Still, Mozilla VPN may offer slightly more flexibility in some scenarios.

Countries and servers: Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad VPN

This section reveals a clear difference between both services.

Mozilla VPN operates servers across around thirty countries, covering common destinations in America, Europe and parts of Asia. Its network suits standard travel needs, yet feels limited for less common locations.

Mullvad VPN provides a broader network, with presence in over forty countries and self-managed servers in several locations. Moreover, it includes advanced options such as bridge servers and configurations that enhance privacy in censored regions.

Regarding geographical diversity and control, Mullvad VPN offers greater flexibility, especially for travellers visiting unconventional destinations.

Speed and performance: Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad VPN

Speed impact plays a key role when working remotely or consuming content on the move.

Mozilla VPN, using WireGuard, maintains stable performance for browsing, video calls and general usage. However, distant or congested connections may experience more noticeable speed drops.

Mullvad VPN stands out for excellent performance, offering low latency and consistent speeds even on remote servers. Its infrastructure minimises speed loss across both desktops and mobile devices.

For remote work, frequent calls or heavy data usage, Mullvad usually delivers a stronger experience.

Dedicated IP for digital nomads

Neither VPN includes a dedicated IP as a standard feature, which remains important to consider.

• Mozilla VPN doesn’t provide a dedicated IP option or similar add-ons.
• Mullvad VPN also avoids dedicated IPs, as they conflict with its shared-anonymity philosophy.

Digital nomads requiring a fixed IP for banking platforms or corporate tools may find limitations here. In that case, consider providers designed specifically for professional use.

No-logs policy: Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad VPN

A strict no-logs policy remains essential when choosing a VPN for international travel. This matters especially when using public networks, working remotely or accessing sensitive services.

Mozilla VPN enforces a strict no-logs policy. It doesn’t store browsing history, traffic data, IP addresses or DNS queries. The service processes minimal technical information strictly for operational purposes. 

Additionally, Mozilla VPN relies on specialised third-party server providers using modern infrastructure and external audits. Although Mozilla operates from the United States, the VPN minimises exposure to legal requests by avoiding identifiable user data storage.

Mullvad VPN applies this concept rigorously. Its no-logs policy ranks among the most consistent in the market. It doesn’t request email, name or personal details to create an account. Users access the service through a random account number, and payments can remain fully anonymous. 

Mullvad uses diskless servers running entirely on RAM. Therefore, any data disappears automatically when the server restarts. Although based in Sweden, its technical architecture significantly limits information-sharing obligations.

In reliability terms, both VPNs genuinely follow no-logs principles. However, Mullvad stands out for anonymity, while Mozilla prioritises institutional transparency and audits.

Security quality: Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad VPN

Regarding security, both Mozilla VPN and Mullvad VPN deliver high standards suitable for travel and remote work.

Mozilla VPN uses the WireGuard protocol, recognised for efficiency and strong security. Its encryption follows modern, robust standards suitable for protecting data on public WiFi networks. It includes an automatic kill switch, which blocks traffic if the VPN disconnects and prevents data leaks. Its approach remains clear: Strong security with minimal configuration complexity.

Mullvad VPN also uses WireGuard as its primary protocol and supports advanced custom configurations. It features a permanent kill switch, DNS and IPv6 leak protection, plus advanced tools such as bridge servers and obfuscation techniques. These features help when travelling to countries with censorship or internet restrictions. 

Its security design suits both advanced users and those seeking an additional protection layer.

In this category, Mullvad offers greater control and additional layers, while Mozilla VPN prioritises strong security with minimal user intervention.

Mozilla VPN vs Mullvad VPN: Which should you choose for travelling abroad?

Choosing between Mozilla VPN and Mullvad VPN depends on your travel style, connection needs and user profile. Below, you’ll find a comparison based on real-world scenarios involving travel, remote work and digital nomad lifestyles.

Which one should you choose?

Both options protect your connection effectively while travelling abroad. However, if privacy and anonymity remain your main priorities, Mullvad may suit you better. If you prefer ease of use and trusted brand support, Mozilla VPN could prove more convenient. Without specific technical requirements, we recommend Mozilla VPN due to its track record and annual plan with money-back guarantee. 

Plans that may interest you

eSIM France

eSIM South Korea

Belén Grima

Read full bio

Related reading