No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Brocade ADX [EOL] vs LoadBalancer Enterprise comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Brocade ADX [EOL]
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
LoadBalancer Enterprise
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (5th)
 

Featured Reviews

it_user735237 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr Technology Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Makes local load balancing relatively simple but could use more options for L7 load balancing
L7 load balancing features like URL re-write, persistence, etc. Also some of the global load balancing features like sticky, sticky-sync, etc Organization has a lot of client facing applications and needs to have multiple servers for scalability. With ADX network load balancer, local load…
SM
Senior L3 Cloud Platform Network & Security Engineer at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
High availability and strong security have supported our apps but advanced traffic control still improves
LoadBalancer Enterprise can be improved because the layer seven programmability is not as powerful as it could be. We cannot write code and programming on it. Additionally, access management and identity options are not available here like they are in F5 VPN. The WAF depth and analytics, such as in-depth logs and the WAF learning option that we have in other load balancers, are much easier to configure and to harden the policies and polish them. That option is not here. Fine-tuning is a bit difficult compared to other solutions. The automation and API maturity does not appear to be at the level of other load balancers. The main limitation is that there is nothing here with regards to F5 APM. There is no iRules option or policy option to manipulate the traffic according to requirements, which is a bit difficult. If an organization is basic and does not want very advanced features, then it is acceptable. However, if advanced features such as iRules are required, and complete detailed WAF monitoring is desired along with policies that can be learned and then implemented afterwards as you have in F5, then LoadBalancer Enterprise lacks these capabilities.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"ADX is better in capacity and its chassis-based product (10K) is much more scalable."
"My advice to others considering this product is that they will experience a very good, stable product which is very easy to set up."
"The features I find valuable in this solution are the ease of managing the logs on the WAFs, the ease to identify break-in attempts into the network, the front-end firewall, and a more specific firewall."
"Performance-wise with LoadBalancer Enterprise, I haven't seen any issues between on-premises and the cloud."
"I would definitely recommend this solution."
"The load balancers have an easy installation and a relatively simple, easy user interface to use, which is valuable because it is not the core business of our engineers to configure network devices."
"F5 is a balancer that is one of the first to do this kind of thing, so it's pretty much a Swiss Army knife for managing all the load balancing techniques."
"The user interface precludes need to be well versed with Linux IPVS command line. This make it easy for junior team members to participate in managing load balancing needs."
"The connection that this solution helps our servers maintain has been most useful."
 

Cons

"Should have more options for L7 load balancing. Also, troubleshooting is a little difficult with this product."
"Among the best features in LoadBalancer Enterprise, I note that some features are still not enabled compared to the on-premises environment."
"It's worth the cost. It's not cheap, but it's a good solution."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"It doesn't have the bonding capability feature."
"LoadBalancer Enterprise could be improved by increasing performance and always being able to handle more simultaneous connections."
"The solution can be a bit pricey."
"There is room for improvement in Loadbalancer.org in certain areas."
"Documentation needs improvement because having information is essential for working with advanced configurations."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It's worth the cost. It's not cheap, but it's a good solution. If you're looking for a good solution, this is a good solution. Is it cheap? No. Is it worth the money? Yes, I think it is."
"It is inexpensive, and even their “unlimited” version, the VA MAX is still far cheaper than competitors."
"The solution requires an annual support license of $2,780 for four systems or $695 a year per unit for support not including the units."
"I love that they do not price on some arbitrary throughput rating where you are guessing at what the load balancer is going to handle."
"We've got an unlimited license, which doesn't costs that much compared to other vendors, and we don't have to buy it again."
"Loadbalancer.org is based on open-source products, but it requires money for support and other activities."
"I’m not entirely sure about the rating since I'm not very technical. I haven't thoroughly compared the ratings. So, if you're asking for my impression so far, I would rate it around five out of 10."
"I think it’s very affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Construction Company
15%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise20
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Do you recommend Loadbalancer.org?
Since Loadbalancer.org is an open-source solution, I would recommend this solution for smaller businesses that don’t have major scaling requirements and don’t have the budget for a commercial solut...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Loadbalancer.org?
The cost of LoadBalancer Enterprise is better and a bit cheaper compared to other products. The support level is also very good, and the maintenance cost is less than other products. The deployment...
What needs improvement with Loadbalancer.org?
LoadBalancer Enterprise can be improved because the layer seven programmability is not as powerful as it could be. We cannot write code and programming on it. Additionally, access management and id...
 

Also Known As

ADX
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Fusebill, Niagra Falls Bridge Commission, Medien System Partner
Vodafone, NASA, Mercedes, NBC, Siemens, AT&T, Barclays, Zurich, Penn State University, Fiserv, Canon, Toyota, University of Cambridge, US Army, US Navy, Ocean Spray, ASOS, Pfizer, BBC, Bacardi, Monsoon, River Island, U.S Air Force, King's College London, NHS, Ricoh, Philips, Santander, TATA Communications, Ericcson, Ross Video, Evertz, TalkTalk TV, Giacom, Rapid Host.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, HAProxy, NetScaler and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.