Avast VPN Review

Avast SecureLine VPN enters this review carrying more baggage than almost any other provider in the market. Between 2014 and 2020, Avast ran a subsidiary called Jumpshot that harvested detailed browsing data from millions of antivirus users and sold it commercially — to Google, Microsoft, McKinsey, and dozens of other corporate clients. This was not a breach, a bug, or a rogue employee. It was a deliberate, years-long business operation that Avast operated while simultaneously marketing itself as a privacy-focused security company. The operation only ended after a joint investigation by PCMag and Motherboard exposed it in January 2020.

That history is the starting point for any honest Avast VPN review, not a footnote.

Avast shut down Jumpshot, overhauled its stated data practices, and eventually merged its parent company into Gen Digital — the same corporate umbrella that owns Norton and Lifelock. The VPN product itself has functional features: WireGuard protocol support, a working kill switch, 10 simultaneous connections. But Avast has never commissioned an independent audit of its current no-logs policy. Its privacy claims today rest entirely on self-reporting from a company with a documented history of monetizing user data at scale.

The score reflects that: 50/100, one of the lowest ratings across the 22 providers we evaluated.

Category	Score
Trust & Value	12/30
VPN Performance	39/70
Overall	50/100
Star Rating	2.5 / 5

---

The Jumpshot Scandal

To understand Avast SecureLine VPN, you need to understand what Avast did with its antivirus users’ data — because the same company is now asking you to route your internet traffic through its servers.

Avast’s free antivirus product installed a browser extension that intercepted web traffic for security scanning. The data collected through this process was passed to Jumpshot, a wholly owned Avast subsidiary, which packaged it and sold it as market intelligence. Jumpshot’s pitch to corporate clients was access to granular user behavior data: what sites people visited, when, from where, and in what sequence.

The scale was significant. Avast claimed hundreds of millions of antivirus users globally. Jumpshot’s client list, as reported by PCMag and Motherboard, included some of the largest corporations in the world. The data being sold was described as “clickstream” data — effectively a reconstruction of users’ browsing histories, attributed at the per-device level.

“The data can be used to track users’ every click and movement across the web with a precision that can feel unsettling.” — PCMag / Motherboard investigation, January 2020

Avast’s response when confronted was that the data was anonymized. Security researchers and the journalists who investigated pushed back: the degree of specificity in the data — individual device sequences across full browsing sessions — made true anonymization effectively impossible. Linking a “de-identified” clickstream to an individual is a well-documented re-identification problem.

The consequences were significant. The US Federal Trade Commission reached a settlement with Avast in 2024 that included a $16.5 million penalty and a prohibition on selling users’ browsing data. Avast was also required to notify affected users and delete data Jumpshot had collected.

Key Jumpshot facts:

• Ran from approximately 2014 to 2020 — six years
• Harvested data from users of Avast’s free antivirus product, most of whom had no idea their browsing was being recorded and sold
• Sold to dozens of corporate clients including Google, Microsoft, Pepsi, Home Depot, and McKinsey
• Ended only after investigative journalism forced the issue — not by Avast’s own initiative
• FTC settlement in 2024: $16.5 million penalty, prohibition on selling browsing data

The reason this matters specifically for the VPN is straightforward: a VPN user is trusting the provider with 100% of their traffic. The entire value of a VPN is privacy. Avast is asking users to extend that trust to a company whose documented history is the opposite of what that trust requires.

---

Security & Privacy Today

Avast has made changes since Jumpshot. The subsidiary was shut down, data practices were revised, and the company has published updated privacy policies. Gen Digital, Avast’s current parent company, operates from Czech Republic headquarters, placing it outside both Five Eyes and Fourteen Eyes surveillance jurisdictions. These are real changes.

What has not changed: Avast SecureLine VPN has never been independently audited.

The absence of an audit is the critical gap. Every credible VPN provider that genuinely operates a no-logs policy has now commissioned third-party verification: NordVPN by Deloitte and PricewaterhouseCoopers, ProtonVPN by SEC Consult, Mullvad by Cure53. An independent audit does not guarantee a no-logs policy is real — auditors can be fooled, audits have defined scopes — but it provides external accountability and creates an institutional record. A provider that has never been audited is asking users to trust its word alone.

For most providers, “no audit” is a yellow flag. For Avast, given the Jumpshot history, it is a red flag.

What Avast’s security architecture offers:

• WireGuard protocol (fast, modern, recommended)
• OpenVPN support
• Kill switch (Windows, Mac, Android, iOS — all platforms)
• DNS leak protection
• 256-bit AES encryption on OpenVPN connections

What it lacks:

• Any independent audit of the no-logs policy
• Warrant canary or transparency report
• Open-source app code
• Multi-hop / double VPN routing
• RAM-only server infrastructure
• Obfuscation for censored networks

The security score of 2/5 reflects the audit gap specifically. The underlying technical architecture is functional — WireGuard and kill switch are genuine positives. But security at the VPN layer means nothing if the operator’s data handling practices are unverified.

---

Speed & Performance

Avast SecureLine VPN ranked #20 of 22 in our speed lab. That is near the bottom of the field.

Metric	Avast SecureLine	Category Leader	Field Average
Download Speed	380 Mbps	920 Mbps	430 Mbps
Speed Lab Rank	#20 / 22	#1 / 22	—
Latency	32ms	18ms	42ms
Packet Loss	0.4%	0.1%	0.8%
Speed Stability	±55 Mbps variance	±15 Mbps	±35 Mbps

At 380 Mbps, Avast delivers below the field average of 430 Mbps, placing it behind most competitors. For users on standard broadband connections (typically 100–500 Mbps), 380 Mbps is workable in isolation — you are unlikely to feel the ceiling in daily use. The problem is what you are giving up relative to providers that offer 600–900 Mbps at comparable or lower prices.

The latency reading of 32ms is moderate — below the field average of 42ms, which is a genuine positive. Packet loss at 0.4% is unremarkable. The stability figure tells the more concerning story: ±55 Mbps variance across sessions means Avast’s performance is inconsistent in ways that can affect real-world use, particularly for video calls and gaming where sustained throughput matters more than peak speed.

The server network context matters here. Avast offers 700+ servers across 35+ countries — the smallest network of any provider we reviewed. A small server fleet creates load distribution problems: when your nearest servers are congested, the fallback options are limited. This contributes directly to the instability variance observed in our testing.

For users with fast fiber connections or who specifically need consistent performance, the combination of #20 speed ranking and high variance is a meaningful limitation.

---

Streaming

Avast SecureLine VPN earned a 4/10 streaming score — the same mark as providers that have made no effort to optimize for streaming platform access.

Platform compatibility (tested):

• Netflix US: Inconsistent — some servers work, most do not
• Netflix UK / other regions: Largely blocked
• Disney+: Partial access, unreliable
• BBC iPlayer: Blocked — confirmed across multiple UK servers
• Peacock TV: Works
• Amazon Prime Video: Inconsistent
• Hulu: Blocked on most servers
• YouTube: Works (standard, non-geo-blocked content)

BBC iPlayer is a hard block. UK expats and international users who rely on iPlayer for live TV and on-demand content will get nothing from Avast’s UK servers. This is not a configuration issue; it reflects Avast’s server infrastructure being identified by iPlayer’s VPN detection.

Netflix access is possible but unreliable. A VPN that sometimes unlocks Netflix is worse for practical use than one that either consistently works or honestly states it doesn’t — unpredictability means constantly troubleshooting which server, if any, currently works.

If streaming is a primary use case, NordVPN and ProtonVPN both offer more reliable, extensively tested platform access with dedicated streaming server infrastructure.

---

Pricing

Avast offers a single product: SecureLine VPN. There are no tiers, no add-ons, no family plans.

Plan	Price	Monthly Rate	Discount vs. Monthly
Monthly	—	Market rate	—
1 Year	$59.88/yr	$4.99/mo	Baseline
2 Years	$105.36 total	$4.39/mo	-12%
3 Years	$141.12 total	$3.92/mo	-22%

At $4.99/month on the annual plan, Avast is mid-range — not the cheapest option, not the most expensive. Budget providers like Private Internet Access offer comparable monthly rates. Premium providers like NordVPN and ProtonVPN cost slightly more but deliver substantially better speed, larger server networks, and — critically — independently verified no-logs policies.

The discount structure is shallow compared to the industry. A 22% discount on a 3-year commitment is the maximum Avast offers. Most competitors offer 50–80% discounts on long-term plans, though those are typically anchored against inflated list prices. Avast’s discount architecture is straightforward, if ungenerous.

The single-plan structure is both a limitation and a clarity. There is no decision to make beyond commitment length. Users who want family sharing, business plans, or a privacy-focused upgrade tier will find no options here.

Money-back guarantee: 30 days, scored 4/5. The refund policy is standard and functional. This is one of the review’s few unambiguous positives — the guarantee is real and the process is not documented as difficult.

Support scored 2/5. Live chat exists but response quality and wait times drew consistent criticism in user feedback. The 1/10 user satisfaction score — the lowest across all reviewed providers — reflects cumulative dissatisfaction across pricing, performance, and the trust concerns that follow Avast as a brand.

---

Who Might Consider Avast VPN

Given the trust history, the absent audit, and the below-average performance, the pool of users for whom Avast SecureLine VPN is the right choice is narrow.

Existing Avast antivirus users represent the most plausible use case. If you already pay for Avast Security and the VPN is available as a bundle add-on at a meaningful discount, the convenience argument has some merit — you have one fewer account to manage, one fewer app to install. That said, the convenience benefit does not resolve the trust concerns; it just adds a familiarity factor to the decision.

Even for existing Avast users, caveats apply:

• The Jumpshot history cannot be undone by a privacy policy update
• No audit means no external verification of current practices
• Speed performance is near the bottom of the market
• BBC iPlayer blocked, streaming generally unreliable
• User satisfaction is the lowest of any reviewed provider

Who should not use Avast VPN:

• Privacy-conscious users for whom the no-logs policy is the whole point
• Users in high-risk environments (journalists, activists, researchers) where trust verification is non-negotiable
• Streamers who need consistent access to BBC iPlayer, Netflix international, or regional libraries
• Speed-sensitive users — gamers, remote workers, heavy file transferers
• Anyone comparing value across providers — better performance and verified privacy are available at similar prices

---

Limitations

The following limitations are worth stating plainly before any purchase decision.

No independent audit. Avast has never published a third-party audit of its no-logs policy. This is the most significant limitation given the company’s history. Privacy claims without audit verification from a provider with documented data-selling behavior is an unreasonable ask of the user.

Jumpshot history cannot be audited away retroactively. Even if Avast commissions and passes an audit tomorrow, the historical record of Jumpshot remains. Users with long memories or high trust requirements will weigh this appropriately.

Speed rank #20 of 22. Near the bottom of the field. The 380 Mbps headline is functional but the high variance (±55 Mbps) means real-world performance is inconsistent.

Smallest server network reviewed. 700+ servers in 35+ countries is the narrowest coverage of any provider in this review set. Limited geographic options, limited load-balancing capacity.

BBC iPlayer blocked. Confirmed across UK servers during testing. Not fixable by switching servers.

Netflix unreliable. Some servers occasionally access Netflix US; consistency is not guaranteed and the majority of servers do not work.

Single plan, no flexibility. No family sharing, no business tier, no privacy-focused upgrade. SecureLine VPN is the only product.

User satisfaction 1/10. The lowest rating across all 22 reviewed providers. User review aggregation consistently surfaces complaints about performance, support quality, and brand trust concerns.

No transparency report or warrant canary. Avast does not publish a record of legal requests received or responded to.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Avast VPN safe to use after the Jumpshot scandal? Avast has taken steps to change its data practices, including shutting down Jumpshot, revising its privacy policy, and agreeing to FTC oversight. However, “safe” in the VPN context requires trust that practices have genuinely changed — and the only way to establish that trust independently is through a third-party audit. Avast has not published one. For users to whom trust verification matters, the absence of an audit is a dealbreaker regardless of stated policy changes.

Has Avast VPN been independently audited? No. As of this review, Avast SecureLine VPN has not published results from an independent audit of its no-logs policy. This places it in a small minority of major providers that have not completed this verification step. NordVPN and ProtonVPN have both completed multiple independent audits with published results.

What is the Jumpshot data-selling scandal? Jumpshot was a subsidiary of Avast that operated from approximately 2014 to 2020. It purchased browsing data harvested from Avast antivirus users and sold it to corporate clients including Google, Microsoft, and McKinsey. The operation was exposed by a joint PCMag and Motherboard investigation in January 2020. Avast shut down Jumpshot within weeks of the reporting. In 2024, the US FTC reached a $16.5 million settlement with Avast over the data practices and imposed a prohibition on selling users’ browsing data going forward.

Does Avast VPN work with Netflix? Inconsistently. Some Avast servers access Netflix US; most do not. Netflix international libraries are largely blocked. If reliable Netflix access is important, Avast’s 4/10 streaming score reflects the problem accurately — it is not a VPN optimized for streaming platform access.

How does Avast VPN compare to Norton Secure VPN? Both are products from Gen Digital (the same corporate parent) and both share similar limitations: no independent audit, modest server networks, and streaming underperformance. Norton earned a slightly higher overall score (67/100) due to better user satisfaction and a VerSprite audit that Avast has not matched. Neither is a top-tier choice for privacy-first users. If you are an existing Gen Digital customer weighing both, Norton’s completed audit makes it the marginally stronger option on trust.

---

The Bottom Line

50/100. Cannot recommend for privacy-conscious users.

Avast SecureLine VPN has functional VPN architecture: WireGuard, a working kill switch on all platforms, AES-256 encryption, 10 simultaneous connections, and a 30-day money-back guarantee. If those features existed in a vacuum, they would describe a mid-range product with some competitive gaps.

They do not exist in a vacuum.

Avast ran a data-selling operation for six years that harvested browsing data from hundreds of millions of users and sold it commercially. That operation was only stopped by investigative journalism, not by internal oversight. The FTC levied a $16.5 million penalty. Avast’s current no-logs policy has never been independently verified. User satisfaction is the lowest of any provider reviewed — a 1/10 that reflects not just performance complaints but an accumulated trust deficit the product has not earned back.

The 50/100 score is honest accounting of that context. Speed at #20 of 22, streaming unreliable, BBC iPlayer blocked, server network the smallest in the review set, and a security score of 2/5 driven entirely by the absent audit.

There are better options at every price point. NordVPN and ProtonVPN both offer independently audited no-logs policies, larger server networks, faster speeds, and more reliable streaming — at comparable or lower annual pricing when factoring in multi-year plans. For users who are already in the Avast ecosystem and would get the VPN at no additional cost as part of a bundle, the convenience argument is at least coherent. For anyone else, the trust calculus doesn’t work.

Read the methodology to understand how trust, audit history, and security practices are weighted across all 22 providers in our review set.

Best for: Existing Avast antivirus customers who receive the VPN bundled and have low trust requirements Not for: Privacy-conscious users, streamers, BBC iPlayer users, anyone comparing providers on value or speed