Short answer: choose WireGuard (or a provider’s WireGuard-based protocol) by default. It’s fast, battery-friendly and built on modern cryptography. Keep OpenVPN for networks that block UDP or VPN-looking traffic, for older routers, or when an organisation requires it.
At a glance
| WireGuard | OpenVPN | |
|---|---|---|
| First released | 2016 (in the Linux kernel since 5.6, 2020) | 2001 |
| Cryptography | Fixed suite: Curve25519, ChaCha20-Poly1305, BLAKE2s | Configurable via OpenSSL (e.g. AES-256-GCM, ChaCha20-Poly1305) |
| Transport | UDP only | UDP or TCP |
| Code size | Small (thousands of lines) | Large (tens of thousands of lines plus OpenSSL) |
| Typical speed | Very high, low latency | Good; slower on mobile and with TCP |
| Roaming (Wi-Fi ↔ mobile) | Seamless | Reconnects |
| Obfuscation | Needs an extra layer | Can run on TCP 443; many obfuscation add-ons |
Security
WireGuard is cryptographically opinionated: one modern cipher suite with no negotiation. You can’t accidentally enable a weak cipher, and the small codebase is practical to audit. If a primitive is ever broken, the whole protocol version changes.
OpenVPN’s flexibility is both a strength and a risk. Well configured, it’s very secure. But configuration mistakes are possible, and its security also depends on the TLS library underneath it.
Privacy: the static IP question
Plain WireGuard keeps each peer’s last-known endpoint IP in memory while the interface is up, and assigns each client a fixed internal address. Commercial VPNs address this with their own systems: double NAT, dynamic address allocation, or clearing the endpoint after a period of inactivity. NordVPN’s NordLynx is one example. Ask your provider how they handle it. It’s a fair question for any WireGuard-based service.
Speed and battery
WireGuard usually wins: fewer round trips to connect, less CPU per packet, and a kernel implementation on Linux. On phones, its quiet-when-idle design saves battery and survives network changes without dropping.
Censorship and restrictive networks
WireGuard traffic is easy to fingerprint and uses UDP, which some networks block. OpenVPN over TCP 443 looks more like ordinary web traffic, though deep packet inspection can still detect it. Most providers now offer dedicated obfuscation protocols that wrap WireGuard or OpenVPN. If you’re on such a network, those matter more than the base protocol.
Which should you use?
- Phone or laptop on everyday networks: WireGuard
- Hotel, campus or workplace Wi-Fi that blocks UDP: OpenVPN TCP or the provider’s obfuscated mode
- Router: whatever your firmware supports well. WireGuard if available, for throughput.
- Self-hosted VPN: WireGuard is far simpler to set up and maintain.
After connecting, confirm nothing leaks with our DNS leak test and WebRTC leak test.
Frequently asked questions
Is WireGuard more secure than OpenVPN?
Both are considered secure when correctly configured. WireGuard's advantage is a much smaller codebase and a fixed modern cipher suite, which reduces the room for misconfiguration and makes auditing easier.
Why do some providers still offer OpenVPN?
OpenVPN can run over TCP port 443, works with mature enterprise tooling and many routers, and is easier to disguise on restrictive networks. Some providers, such as Mullvad, removed it entirely in January 2026 to focus on WireGuard.