VPNs Supporting WireGuard

Bottom Line: WireGuard is faster, leaner, and easier to audit. It is the right choice for most users today. OpenVPN remains the gold standard for compatibility and flexibility, especially in restrictive network environments where TCP port 443 tunneling bypasses VPN blocks. Most leading VPN providers now support both.

VPNs encrypt your web traffic, mask your IP, and keep data safe from hackers, ISPs, and surveillance. They provide privacy on public Wi-Fi and help bypass geo-restrictions. See our best VPN comparison to find a provider that supports both protocols.

OpenVPN and WireGuard are two of the most widely deployed VPN protocols. OpenVPN has earned its reputation through decades of security auditing. WireGuard, released in 2018, delivers faster speeds with a fraction of the code. Below, we compare them across speed, security, codebase, and real-world use cases.

Quick Comparison: WireGuard vs OpenVPN at a Glance

What Is OpenVPN?

OpenVPN is a robust, open-source VPN protocol. Released in 2001, it is one of the oldest protocols still in active use. Its open-source codebase allows anyone to inspect, audit, and contribute improvements. Over two decades of community scrutiny have made OpenVPN a dependable choice for individuals and enterprises alike.

How Does OpenVPN Function?

OpenVPN uses SSL/TLS (Secure Sockets Layer/Transport Layer Security) for encryption and authentication. This is the same cryptographic framework that protects HTTPS websites.

When a connection starts, OpenVPN performs a handshake. The client and server exchange certificates and keys to verify each other’s identity. Data then flows through ciphers like AES-256-GCM, providing strong protection.

OpenVPN runs on both TCP and UDP. TCP guarantees packet delivery at the cost of speed. UDP prioritizes speed but may lose packets. Users choose the mode that fits their needs.

OpenVPN Pros and Cons

Pros

→ Robust Security and Encryption: OpenVPN’s SSL/TLS implementation and AES-256-GCM cipher deliver proven, battle-tested security.
→ Extensive Compatibility: It runs on virtually every operating system and device type, from Windows XP to modern routers.
→ Highly Configurable: Power users can adjust port numbers, cipher suites, authentication methods, and routing behavior.

Cons

→ Slower Speeds: The heavier encryption and multi-step handshake process produce lower throughput than WireGuard. Typical speeds range from 150–250 Mbps.
→ Complex Setup: Manual configuration requires editing .ovpn files, managing certificates, and understanding networking concepts.
→ Greater Resource Consumption: CPU usage can reach 15–30% on mobile devices, draining battery faster than lighter protocols.

VPNs Featuring OpenVPN

Several popular VPN services include OpenVPN as a protocol option:

→ NordVPN: Offers strong OpenVPN support with automatic server selection and AES-256-GCM encryption.
→ ExpressVPN: Provides OpenVPN as a base protocol option alongside its proprietary Lightway protocol.
→ Surfshark: Includes OpenVPN as a default choice on all major platforms.
→ Private Internet Access (PIA): Known for its rich OpenVPN configuration options, appealing to power users who want granular control.
→ CyberGhost: Incorporates OpenVPN across its desktop and mobile apps with a user-friendly interface.

These services handle OpenVPN configuration automatically through their apps. Users select the protocol in settings and connect with one click.

What Is WireGuard?

WireGuard is a modern, open-source VPN protocol built for speed, simplicity, and cryptographic rigor. Its designers aimed to outperform OpenVPN and IPsec on every metric while keeping the codebase small enough for a single researcher to audit in a weekend.

WireGuard’s ~4,000 lines of code compare to OpenVPN’s 100,000+ lines. This lean architecture reduces the attack surface and simplifies maintenance. The Linux kernel has included WireGuard natively since version 5.6 (March 2020), signaling strong confidence from the open-source community.

How WireGuard Works

WireGuard uses the Noise protocol framework for secure communication. It combines Curve25519 for key exchange, ChaCha20 for symmetric encryption, Poly1305 for message authentication, and BLAKE2s for hashing.

These modern cryptographic primitives eliminate the need for cipher negotiation. WireGuard connects in roughly 100 milliseconds, compared to OpenVPN’s 1–2 second handshake. Data transfer carries minimal overhead, maximizing throughput.

WireGuard operates exclusively over UDP. This keeps latency low and makes it ideal for real-time applications like video calls, gaming, and streaming.

WireGuard Pros and Cons

Pros

→ Faster Speeds: Real-world benchmarks show WireGuard reaching 300–400+ Mbps on modern hardware, roughly double typical OpenVPN speeds.
→ Auditable Codebase: At ~4,000 lines, security researchers can review the entire protocol in hours rather than weeks.
→ Simpler Setup: Configuration requires only a public key, endpoint address, and allowed IPs. No certificate management needed.
→ Lower Resource Usage: CPU usage stays around 5–10% on mobile devices, preserving battery life on phones and tablets.

Cons

→ Newer Protocol: Released in 2018, WireGuard has less real-world battle-testing than OpenVPN’s 20+ year history.
→ Early Privacy Concerns with Static IP Assignment: Initial implementations stored user IPs on the server. Major VPN providers have solved this through techniques like NordVPN’s double NAT system in NordLynx.
→ Limited Legacy Device Support: Older operating systems and some enterprise routers lack native WireGuard support.

VPNs Supporting WireGuard

Most major VPN providers now offer WireGuard:

→ NordVPN: Supports WireGuard through its NordLynx implementation, which adds double NAT for enhanced privacy.
→ ExpressVPN: Offers WireGuard alongside its proprietary Lightway protocol.
→ Surfshark: Provides WireGuard as the default protocol on most platforms.
→ Private Internet Access (PIA): Supports WireGuard with full configuration options in its desktop and mobile apps.
→ Mullvad VPN: One of the earliest WireGuard adopters, offering it as the primary recommended protocol.

Key Differences Between WireGuard and OpenVPN

The comparison table above captures the high-level differences. Below, we examine each category in detail.

Speed: WireGuard Delivers Higher Throughput

✔️ WireGuard: Reaches 300–400+ Mbps on modern hardware. Its streamlined handshake (~100 ms) and ChaCha20 encryption minimize processing delay.
❌ OpenVPN: Typically reaches 150–250 Mbps under the same conditions. Its multi-step SSL/TLS handshake and AES processing add latency.

Independent speed tests from providers like NordVPN show WireGuard (via NordLynx) outperforming OpenVPN by 40–60% on average across global server locations.

Security: Different Approaches, Both Effective

✔️ WireGuard: Uses fixed, modern cryptographic primitives. Its ~4,000-line codebase has undergone formal verification of its cryptographic handshake.
❌ OpenVPN: Relies on the configurable SSL/TLS stack. Its 100,000+ lines of code make comprehensive auditing more time-consuming, but 20+ years of real-world deployment have identified and patched most vulnerabilities.

Neither protocol has known exploitable flaws when properly implemented.

Codebase Size: Auditability Matters

✔️ WireGuard: ~4,000 lines. A single security researcher can audit the entire protocol in a day. Fewer lines mean fewer places for bugs to hide.
❌ OpenVPN: 100,000+ lines. Full audits require teams of researchers over weeks. The larger surface area increases the statistical probability of undiscovered vulnerabilities.

Configuration Complexity

✔️ WireGuard: Setup requires a keypair, an endpoint, and allowed IP ranges. Total configuration fits in about 10 lines.
❌ OpenVPN: Requires certificate generation, server/client config files, cipher selection, and port configuration. A typical setup involves 50–100 lines of configuration.

Resource Usage on Mobile and Embedded Devices

✔️ WireGuard: Uses roughly 5–10% CPU on smartphones. Battery drain is minimal, making it ideal for always-on mobile VPN connections.
❌ OpenVPN: Uses roughly 15–30% CPU on smartphones. Noticeable battery impact during extended use.

Technical Deep Dive: Cryptographic Methods

✔️ WireGuard: Employs Curve25519 (key exchange), ChaCha20 (encryption), Poly1305 (authentication), and BLAKE2s (hashing). No cipher negotiation occurs. If a vulnerability is found in any primitive, the entire protocol version is updated.
❌ OpenVPN: Supports dozens of cipher suites through the OpenSSL library. This flexibility can be a strength or a weakness. Misconfigured cipher selection can weaken security.

Connection Establishment

✔️ WireGuard: Completes its handshake in ~100 ms using a single round-trip exchange. Roaming between networks (Wi-Fi to cellular) happens seamlessly.
❌ OpenVPN: Requires 1–2 seconds for its multi-step TLS handshake. Network switches often require a full reconnection.

Transport Protocol

✔️ WireGuard: UDP only. This keeps overhead minimal but can be blocked by firewalls that restrict non-standard UDP traffic.
❌ OpenVPN: Supports both TCP and UDP. TCP mode on port 443 makes VPN traffic indistinguishable from regular HTTPS browsing, which is critical for censorship bypass.

Similarities Between WireGuard and OpenVPN

Despite their architectural differences, both protocols share fundamental characteristics that make them trusted choices for VPN connections.

Secure Encrypted Connections

Both protocols create encrypted tunnels between the user’s device and a VPN server. Their primary function is protecting data from interception by third parties, whether hackers, ISPs, or government surveillance.

Strong Encryption Standards

Both WireGuard and OpenVPN employ encryption methods that are currently considered unbreakable by brute force. WireGuard uses ChaCha20-Poly1305. OpenVPN typically uses AES-256-GCM. Neither has been publicly broken.

IP Address Masking

Both protocols replace the user’s real IP address with the VPN server’s IP. This provides online anonymity and prevents websites, advertisers, and network operators from tracking browsing activity back to the user’s physical location.

Open-Source Transparency

Both WireGuard and OpenVPN publish their source code publicly. Anyone can inspect, audit, or contribute to either project. This transparency is a core trust factor for privacy-focused users and security researchers.

Will WireGuard Replace OpenVPN?

WireGuard will not replace OpenVPN in the foreseeable future. Each protocol serves different use cases that the other cannot fully cover.

WireGuard’s adoption is accelerating. Its inclusion in the Linux kernel, support from every major VPN provider, and default-protocol status in services like Surfshark and Mullvad signal a clear industry shift. For consumer VPN use, WireGuard is already the de facto standard.

OpenVPN’s flexibility keeps it essential. Its TCP mode, cipher configurability, and universal device support make it irreplaceable for enterprise environments, legacy systems, and censorship-heavy regions.

Both Protocols Will Coexist

The VPN industry has settled on a dual-protocol model. Most providers offer both WireGuard and OpenVPN, letting users switch based on their current situation. Streaming from home? Use WireGuard. Connecting from a hotel network in a restrictive country? Switch to OpenVPN on TCP 443.

This coexistence benefits users. Competition between protocols drives innovation in both projects.

Final Verdict

WireGuard and OpenVPN are both strong, well-maintained VPN protocols. WireGuard delivers faster speeds (300–400+ Mbps), lower latency (100 ms handshake), and a leaner codebase (4,000 lines) that simplifies security auditing. OpenVPN provides broader device compatibility, granular configuration options, and TCP-based censorship bypass that WireGuard cannot match.

For most users, WireGuard is the better default choice. It is faster, lighter on resources, and simpler to configure. Switch to OpenVPN when you encounter blocked UDP traffic, need TCP reliability, or connect from legacy devices.

The best VPN providers support both protocols and let you switch freely.