Précis: Monitoring visual fields (VFs) through virtual reality devices proved to have good inter-test and test-retest reliability, as well as easy usability, when self-administered by individuals with and without VF defects in a remote setting. Purpose: To assess the reliability of remote, self-administered VF monitoring using a virtual reality VF (VRVF) device in individuals without ocular disease and with stable VF defects. Materials and Methods: Individuals without ocular disease and with stable defects were recruited. All participants had a baseline standard automated perimetry (SAP) test. Participants tested remotely on a VRVF device for 4 weeks (examinations V₁, V₂, V₃, and V₄), with the last 3 unassisted. The mean sensitivities of VRVF results were compared with each other and to SAP results for reliability. Results: A total of 42 eyes from 21 participants were tested on the VRVF device. Participants tested consistently although external factors impacted outcomes. VRVF results were in reasonable agreement with the baseline SAP. Examinations performed by the cohort with stable defects evinced better agreement with SAP examinations (V2, P = 0.79; V3, P = 0.39; V4, P = 0.35) than those reported by the cohort without ocular disease (V2, P = 0.02; V3, P = 0.15; V4, P = 0.22), where the null hypothesis is that the instruments agree. Fixation losses were high and variable in VRVF examinations compared with those of SAP, particularly in certain test takers. Participants considered the device comfortable and easy to use. Conclusions: Self-administered, remote VF tests on a VRVF device showed satisfactory test-retest reliability, good inter-test agreement with SAP, and acceptability by its users. External factors may impact at-home testing and age and visual impairment may hinder fixation. Future studies to expand the sample size and understand inconsistencies in fixation losses are recommended.