# Mullvad Browser vs WaterFox: privacy compared

| Criterion | Mullvad Browser | WaterFox |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Grade | A (90/100) | B (85/100) |
| Jurisdiction | Sweden (Fourteen Eyes) | United Kingdom (Five Eyes) |
| Open source | Yes | Yes |
| No trackers or telemetry | Yes | Yes |
| No ads or data sales | Yes | Yes |
| Independent audit | No | No |
| Blocks trackers by default | Yes | Yes |
| Fingerprinting protection | Yes | Partial |
| No calls to big-tech services | Yes | Yes |
| Timely security updates | Yes | Yes |

**Mullvad Browser.** Mullvad Browser scores 90 out of 100 (grade A) on the browsers criteria. It meets 7 of 8 criteria: open source, no trackers or telemetry, no ads or data sales, blocks trackers by default, fingerprinting protection, no calls to big-tech services and timely security updates. It does not meet independent audit. It is based in Sweden: Fourteen Eyes member; EU member (GDPR).

**WaterFox.** WaterFox scores 85 out of 100 (grade B) on the browsers criteria. It meets 6 of 8 criteria: open source, no trackers or telemetry, no ads or data sales, blocks trackers by default, no calls to big-tech services and timely security updates. It partly meets fingerprinting protection. It does not meet independent audit. It is based in the United Kingdom: Five Eyes member; GDPR-style data protection law; CLOUD Act data access agreement with the US.

Source: https://privacyratings.com/compare/browsers/mullvad-browser-vs-waterfox/