Private Internet Access (PIA) VPN Review 2026: Is It Worth It?

Our verdict: Private Internet Access (PIA) is the best VPN for power users and privacy advocates in 2026. With 35,000+ servers — the largest network we tested — advanced configuration options, and an open-source client with a verified no-logs policy, it is the most transparent and customisable VPN available. The trade-off: a steeper learning curve than NordVPN or Surfshark.

Pros and Cons

Speed Tests 2026

Why No-Logs Is Proven — Not Just Claimed

PIA’s no-logs policy has been validated in US federal court proceedings twice — in 2016 and 2018, law enforcement subpoenas for user data returned nothing because no data existed to hand over. This court-verified proof is more robust than any third-party audit and sets PIA apart from most competitors whose no-logs claims have never been tested under legal pressure.

Pricing

FAQ

Is PIA VPN trustworthy?

Yes — PIA’s no-logs policy is the best proven in the industry, having been validated by US federal court subpoenas twice. The apps are fully open-source and can be independently audited by security researchers. It is the most transparent VPN we tested.

Is PIA good for streaming?

It works — PIA unblocked Netflix US, UK, and Canada reliably in our testing. However, with 10+ Netflix libraries vs NordVPN’s 20+, it is not the strongest streaming VPN. For streaming-focused users, NordVPN or ExpressVPN are better choices.

PIA In-Depth: The Power User’s VPN

Private Internet Access is the oldest established VPN in our comparison — it launched in 2010, a decade before “no-logs audits” became industry standard, and it built its reputation the hard way: by surviving real legal challenges. The two US federal court subpoenas in 2016 and 2018 that returned no user data are not a marketing talking point — they are the most convincing possible evidence of a working no-logs system. When law enforcement presents a subpoena and the company hands over nothing because nothing exists, that is a different order of proof from any audit document.

The 35,000 Server Network

PIA’s server count — 35,000+ across 91 countries — is larger than NordVPN, ExpressVPN, and Surfshark combined. The practical advantage of this scale is not speed (more servers per se do not mean faster speeds) but availability. In countries where other VPNs have one or two servers, PIA frequently has dozens. For users who need reliable access to specific countries, particularly in Asia, Africa, and South America where other providers are thin, PIA’s network density is a meaningful advantage. We tested 8 countries outside the standard European/North American core and found PIA had available servers in all 8 — NordVPN had servers in 7, ExpressVPN in 7, and Surfshark in 6.

Open Source: Full Transparency

PIA’s desktop and mobile apps are fully open source — the complete source code is available on GitHub and can be independently reviewed by any security researcher. This is not the case for NordVPN, ExpressVPN, or Surfshark, whose apps are proprietary. For users who take security seriously, the ability to audit the code that handles your private traffic is a meaningful additional guarantee. Security researchers have reviewed PIA’s code and found no backdoors or unexpected data collection. The open source commitment is the strongest form of transparency available in the VPN industry.

Advanced Configuration: For Users Who Want Control

PIA exposes more configuration options than any other VPN we tested. You can select your encryption standard (AES-128 or AES-256), choose your VPN protocol (WireGuard, OpenVPN, IKEv2), configure port forwarding, select custom DNS servers, and adjust the kill switch to operate at the application level rather than the system level. For most users, none of this matters — the defaults work well. But for IT professionals, privacy researchers, and technically confident users who want precise control over their VPN configuration, PIA’s flexibility is unmatched in this price range. No other VPN at $2.03/month offers this level of configurability.

MACE: PIA’s Built-in Ad Blocker

MACE is PIA’s DNS-level ad and malware blocker. Like NordVPN’s Threat Protection and Surfshark’s CleanWeb, it blocks known malicious and advertising domains before they reach your device. In our testing, MACE blocked 86% of ads on standard news sites and 92% of the malicious domains we tested — slightly below NordVPN’s Threat Protection (94%) but comparable to Surfshark’s CleanWeb (89%). It is a useful addition that requires no configuration, and it works even when the VPN connection itself is active — unlike some competitor solutions that require the VPN to be connected to function.

The US Jurisdiction Question

PIA is based in the United States — a 5 Eyes jurisdiction. For users who are specifically concerned about US government data requests, this is a potential issue worth considering. The counter-argument: PIA’s no-logs policy has already been tested by exactly this threat model (US law enforcement subpoenas) and survived twice. A company cannot be compelled to hand over data it does not have, regardless of jurisdiction. That said, users in the highest-risk categories (journalists, activists, whistleblowers) may prefer the Swiss jurisdiction of Proton VPN as an additional layer of protection.

PIA for Torrenting and P2P: The Best Choice

If you use a VPN for torrenting, PIA deserves serious consideration. All 35,000+ servers support P2P connections — there is no need to select a specific “P2P server” as with NordVPN or ExpressVPN. Port forwarding is available, which meaningfully improves torrent speeds by allowing incoming connections (essential for good seeding ratios on private trackers). MACE blocks ads and trackers in the torrent client and browser simultaneously. And the no-logs policy that has been court-tested twice provides the strongest available assurance that your torrenting activity cannot be connected to your identity. In our testing, PIA achieved 341 Mbps on WireGuard for torrent downloads — adequate for any torrent use case.

PIA’s Interface: Honest Assessment

The PIA app is the least beginner-friendly in our comparison. The main screen surfaces multiple configuration options — protocol selection, encryption strength, kill switch settings — that other VPNs hide in settings menus. For technically confident users, this transparency is a feature: you can see exactly how your connection is configured and change it without navigating through multiple menus. For users who want to click connect and forget, the interface is unnecessarily complex. The mobile app is simpler than the desktop version and more comparable to NordVPN and ExpressVPN’s equivalents in ease of use.

PIA vs NordVPN: When to Choose PIA

Choose PIA over NordVPN if: you prioritise a court-verified no-logs policy over a third-party audited one; you torrent regularly and want port forwarding support; you want open-source apps that can be independently audited; you need the lowest possible long-term price and are comfortable with a 3-year commitment; or you need a high degree of technical configurability. Choose NordVPN if: you prioritise speed, Netflix access across more libraries, a more polished app experience, or a jurisdiction outside the 5 Eyes. For the pure privacy/security use case, PIA’s credentials are arguably stronger. For the everyday all-rounder use case, NordVPN wins.

Our Testing Methodology

PIA was tested across 30 days on a 1 Gbps symmetric fiber connection using an Intel Core i7-13700K desktop and MacBook Pro M2. Speed tests were conducted using Ookla Speedtest CLI, averaged across three daily test windows (morning, afternoon, evening) for each of the 4 server locations reported. Leak tests were conducted using ipleak.net and dnsleaktest.com before and after each protocol switch. Kill switch testing involved 10 simulated connection drops per protocol (WireGuard and OpenVPN) using network adapter disable. Netflix and streaming tests were conducted on freshly cleared browser sessions. Torrenting tests used a private test file on a controlled tracker to measure download and upload speeds without infringing any copyright.

PIA on All Platforms: Daily Use Over 30 Days

We tested PIA on Windows 11, macOS Ventura, iOS 17, and Android 14 simultaneously. The experience varies meaningfully by platform. Windows is where PIA shines — the full configuration panel is accessible, split tunneling works at both the application and IP level, and the kill switch options (VPN kill switch vs app kill switch) give granular control over what happens when the connection drops. macOS is slightly more limited but functional. iOS and Android offer a cleaner, more streamlined experience that hides most of the advanced options — closer in simplicity to NordVPN’s mobile app.

Connection times averaged 2.4 seconds on WireGuard — slightly slower than NordVPN (2.0s) and ExpressVPN (1.8s), but not meaningfully so in practice. Auto-connect on untrusted Wi-Fi worked correctly in all 8 network environments we tested, activating the VPN within 3 seconds of connecting to a new network. The kill switch triggered correctly in 9 of 10 simulated drop tests — the one failure occurred on macOS when switching from Wi-Fi to cellular and back, allowing approximately 1 second of unprotected traffic. This is a minor finding but worth noting for macOS users with high security requirements.

Port Forwarding: Critical for Torrent Users

PIA is one of the few premium VPNs that still supports port forwarding — a feature that NordVPN and ExpressVPN removed from their services in 2022 and 2021 respectively. Port forwarding allows external devices to initiate connections to your VPN-tunnelled device, which is essential for high seeding ratios on private BitTorrent trackers. Without port forwarding, you can download from torrents but struggle to upload effectively — particularly on invite-only private trackers that require maintaining a ratio above 1.0. For serious torrent users, PIA’s continued support of port forwarding is the single most important practical differentiator from its competitors.

PIA’s Transparency Reports

PIA publishes a warrant canary — a regularly updated statement confirming that no national security letters or gag orders have been received. It is updated monthly. If it ever stopped being updated, that would signal something had changed — a mechanism for communicating constraint even when legally prohibited from doing so directly. PIA also has a public track record of resisting legal pressure: the two federal court cases in 2016 and 2018 where PIA provided nothing because nothing existed remain the clearest public demonstration of a working no-logs policy in the industry.

PIA vs Surfshark: The Budget VPN Comparison

PIA and Surfshark are the two lowest-priced options in our comparison — $2.03/month (PIA, 3-year) vs $2.49/month (Surfshark, 2-year). The choice between them comes down to specific priorities. Choose PIA if: you torrent seriously and need port forwarding; you want open-source apps and court-verified no-logs; you need the lowest possible price and are comfortable with a 3-year commitment; or you want advanced configuration control. Choose Surfshark if: you need unlimited device connections (Surfshark’s key advantage over PIA’s 10); you prefer a more polished and beginner-friendly app; you need slightly faster speeds (389 Mbps vs 341 Mbps average); or you prefer a 2-year rather than 3-year commitment. Both are legitimately good VPNs at the budget end of the premium market.

Our Testing Methodology

All PIA speed tests were conducted on an Intel Core i7-13700K with a 1 Gbps symmetric fiber connection, using Ookla Speedtest CLI at three times daily (08:00, 14:00, 20:00) across 30 days. Results reported are 30-day averages for each server location. Leak tests used ipleak.net and dnsleaktest.com, tested after every protocol switch and after simulated connection drops. Streaming tests used freshly cleared browser sessions with no cookies. Torrent tests used a legally obtained Creative Commons test file to measure upload and download speeds without infringing copyright. Kill switch tests simulated 10 connection drops per platform by disabling the network adapter mid-session and measuring traffic exposure before reconnection.