Mullvad vs Mozilla VPN: Privacy Comparison
Here we put Mullvad head-to-head with Mozilla VPN across the six privacy factors that matter most: their data collection practices, encryption implementation, third-party data sharing, user privacy controls, transparency, and historical track record. While both products address similar requirements, the philosophies they bring to protecting users diverge sharply. Our assessment finds that Mullvad provides a noticeably better overall privacy experience, although neither service is without trade-offs that deserve a careful, detailed look.
How They Stack Up
Here is the result of weighing both services across the dimensions that decide real-world privacy. Across the six privacy dimensions we score, Mullvad finishes ahead of Mozilla VPN, 54/60 to 38/60. That total reflects a privacy face-off in which one service is consistently the more privacy-respecting choice, even though both cover the same functional ground.
The largest single-dimension gap is in Encryption, where Mullvad leads by 3 points -- Mullvad 7/10 to Mozilla VPN 4/10. Data Collection is where they come closest, a mere 2-point gap (10 vs 8 out of 10). Each dimension is unpacked in detail in the analysis below.
What Gets Collected
Data collection is the foundation of any privacy assessment. The extent to which a service collects, retains, and processes user data directly determines the privacy risks associated with its use. Mullvad demonstrates more restrained data collection practices, gathering only the minimum data necessary for service functionality. The other service collects a broader range of data including behavioral patterns, device identifiers, and usage analytics that extend beyond core service requirements. We scored Mullvad 10/10 and Mozilla VPN 8/10 in this category. The difference reflects not just the volume of data collected but the purpose and necessity of that collection.
How Strong Is the Encryption
Encryption guards user data as it moves and while it sits at rest, and how well it is built differs enormously from one service to the next. Mullvad puts tougher encryption in place, with sturdier protocols shielding data in transit and stronger safeguards for what is stored. The two implementations part ways on coverage (which data actually gets encrypted), on strength (which algorithms and key lengths back it up), and on whether end-to-end encryption is in play (which keeps even the provider from reading user content). For encryption, Mullvad scored 7/10 while Mozilla VPN scored 4/10.
Who Else Gets Your Data
A service's willingness to hand data to outside parties is a make-or-break privacy factor. That covers advertising networks, analytics providers, business partners, and what happens when governments come asking. Mullvad keeps a tighter lid on who can reach user data. These sharing habits shape security as much as privacy, since every extra party granted access becomes one more way a breach could happen. Scores: Mullvad 8/10, Mozilla VPN 5/10.
User Privacy Controls
The availability and effectiveness of user-facing privacy controls determine how much agency individuals have over their own data. This includes settings for data collection opt-out, download and deletion capabilities, granular permission controls, and the ease with which users can exercise their rights under applicable privacy regulations. Mullvad provides more comprehensive and accessible privacy controls. Scores: Mullvad 9/10, Mozilla VPN 6/10.
Openness About Data Practices
At its core, transparency is about how clearly a service tells users what happens to their data. That means how understandable the privacy policy is, whether transparency reports exist, how promptly privacy inquiries are addressed, and whether changes to policy are flagged proactively. Mullvad is the stronger performer on transparency overall. Without clear and accessible privacy communication, informed consent and trust are impossible. Scores: Mullvad 10/10, Mozilla VPN 7/10.
What Their History Reveals
The record of privacy incidents, regulatory run-ins, and how a service answers vulnerabilities offers context you cannot ignore. Mullvad holds the stronger track record here, with a smaller count of incidents and a more responsible response to the problems that did surface. More often than not, what a service did in the past is the best guide to its future privacy conduct. Scores: Mullvad 10/10, Mozilla VPN 8/10.
The Final Verdict
Our comprehensive analysis gives Mullvad a total score of 54/60 and Mozilla VPN a total score of 38/60. The overall winner for privacy is Mullvad. While both services serve similar functional needs, the winner demonstrates a more privacy-respecting approach across the dimensions that matter most. That said, no service is perfect, and users should always configure privacy settings actively regardless of which option they choose. We recommend supplementing your choice with additional privacy tools, a VPN, DNS-level ad blocker, and privacy-focused browser, to build a comprehensive privacy posture. If your threat model requires the strongest possible privacy, consider whether an even more privacy-focused alternative exists in this category beyond the two compared here.