We performed a comparison between Avi Networks Software Load Balancer and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of the solution for my organization is its UI since it allows us to see the clusters while providing a very specific and good overall understanding."
"What's most valuable in Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is its deployment capability, the ability to deploy in a dispersed service, with the service engines that can disperse and have a single control plane that can control the load balancing services across any available platform, wherever needed. The analytics of Avi Networks Software Load Balancer and flexibility of deployment are its most valuable features and the reasons why many people buy it."
"The interface and software features are the most valuable aspects of this solution."
"The solution has simplified our network infrastructure management."
"The solution is stable."
"The WAF - the web application firewall itself - is great."
"The friendly user interface is valuable."
"Its visibility and login mechanism are the best parts. In addition to the great visibility it has a great dashboard and an easy to configure graphic user interface, a beautiful GUI."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 1000 users who use it daily."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"Azure Application Gateway's most valuable feature is ease of use. The configuration is straightforward. It isn't difficult to adjust the size of your instances in the settings. You can do that with a few clicks, and the configuration file is the same way. You can also set rules and policies with minimal time and effort."
"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly."
"This is a SaaS product, so it is always up to date."
"The production is a valuable feature."
"I did not go with it because their APM module is a different product altogether. It's a common thing that companies do. They sell something and then they add on top of it as a different product. It is a type of marketing strategy. But when it comes to the overall management, it takes a lot of time to really look into it."
"One struggle with Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is its integration with other VMware products. Integration could be improved in the solution so that you have a more unified control plane with it and other data center security and networking products that VMware sells. There has been a bit of a lag on the roadmap of new features that have come out there recently, but better interoperability with the hyperscale environments such as the AWS, Azure, GCPs of the world, and simpler deployment and interoperability with those existing tools, are areas that are receiving attention and could use additional attention today. These are the areas for improvement in Avi Networks Software Load Balancer."
"The network analytics and monitoring features are not effective."
"It doesn't match the development structure or user community of our existing product. It pales in comparison to that."
"IDS and IPS sites need to be more progressive."
"Avi Networks Software Load Balancer needs to improve its documentation."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"In terms of improvement, the pricing and documentation need improvement. We have had problems getting the documents."
"The solution could improve by increasing the performance when doing updates. For example, if I change the certificate it can take 30 minutes. Other vendors do not have this type of problem."
"The monitoring on the solution could be better."
"The configuration is very specific right now and needs to be much more flexible."
"The product could be easier to use and implement."
"In the next release, the solution could improve the integration with Service Mesh and other Azure Security Services."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive."
"For the first-time user, it is difficult to understand so the user-interface needs to be improved."
"Scalability can be an issue."
More Avi Networks Software Load Balancer Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is ranked 9th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 8 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 4th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 38 reviews. Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Avi Networks Software Load Balancer writes "Easy to set up and has good integration into the host environment but needs better third party integration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix NetScaler, HAProxy and NGINX Plus, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, AWS WAF and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Avi Networks Software Load Balancer vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
