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

Brocade ADX [EOL] vs LoadBalancer Enterprise comparison

 

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
30
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (8th)
 

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."
"The most valuable features of Loadbalancer.org are related to its load balancing capabilities."
"The performance is good."
"It helps us to route the traffic to the available servers."
"The SSL Layer 7 load balancing is valuable."
"We have about 30,000 connections going through at any one time and it's fine, it doesn't seem to sweat. It doesn't get overloaded."
"In my opinion, the best features offered by LoadBalancer Enterprise are high availability, performance, and resilience."
"LoadBalancer Enterprise has positively impacted our organization because it includes everything, such as licensing cuts and total cost of ownership, which makes budgeting predictable."
"We can more easily set up a test environment, because you can easily configure your forms. It makes it more flexible for us, to convert our test environment to a production environment, without having to change DNSs on the outside. You just configure the forms on the inside. So without changing the actual endpoint for the end user, we can create completely different networks in the background."
 

Cons

"Should have more options for L7 load balancing. Also, troubleshooting is a little difficult with this product."
"We have had one or two small crashes on them, nothing major, but I guess that would be the only thing stopping it from being a 10."
"They're mostly designed to balance a particular type of traffic. I wanted to load balance DNS, and they just don't do it the way that we wanted to. So they're not used as DNS load balancers."
"If I have to say something, I suppose they could add an automated configuration backup to an FTP location (or something similar) so you don’t have to manually do it. I don’t see this as a problem, of course, as the configuration rarely changes and we only need one backup, but maybe for other users that feature would be handy."
"​The automatic refresh of the System Overview webpage: It sometimes has an extra webpage reload (after a change) before you see it is executed. This can be confusing."
"Among the best features in LoadBalancer Enterprise, I note that some features are still not enabled compared to the on-premises environment."
"I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"The solution can be a bit pricey."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Licensing fees are paid annually."
"It was easy to upgrade the license for unlimited clusters and servers. Pricing is fair."
"Loadbalancer.org is based on open-source products, but it requires money for support and other activities."
"They're not the cheapest, not the most expensive, but I think value-wise, they're 100%."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Construction Company
17%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise19
 

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?
I purchased LoadBalancer Enterprise through the AWS marketplace. With the licensing and setup cost, I think it is pretty good, but the overall cost is not something I am aware of. That is handled b...
What needs improvement with Loadbalancer.org?
LoadBalancer Enterprise could provide more flexibility in terms of configuration setup, making it more user-friendly when switching between other software. LoadBalancer Enterprise could work more o...
 

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, Radware and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: July 2026.
908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.