Fortinet FortiADC vs Loadbalancer.org comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Fortinet FortiADC
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Loadbalancer.org
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of Fortinet FortiADC is 11.4%, up from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Loadbalancer.org is 4.0%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
Unique Categories:
No other categories found
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

Saeid Khanipour Ghobani - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 9, 2022
High-level load balancing and routing protocols but scalability is limited to 200 gigabits
The initial setup and configuration are very easy because the solution includes a simple OS. Initial configuration takes about ten minutes for simple environments. It is important to assess the environment and decide what services, servers, and web applications are needed. The solution can be configured in router mode or one-arm mode which uses source NAT as destination NAT to send traffic to the firewall. One-arm mode is more complex and requires discussions with our engineers. For example, you have a website with Node.js for your programming language, Amazon S3 for your CDN, NGINX for your web server, and you use both React and reCAPTCHA. Our team meets with your developer to learn your website and OS through a multi-step process and then we configure the solution to protect everything.
Roger Seelaender - PeerSpot reviewer
Oct 21, 2022
Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised
The solution can be improved with the development of a SIP engine because it is difficult to manage SBCs. All SBCs are really tough to write rules for. If we could put this in front of an SBC to have the right rules to possibly block the traffic, that would be very helpful. The solution can also improve the relationship between Loadbalancer.org and Metaswitch, or now, Microsoft because Metaswitch was purchased by Microsoft. They both position themselves as certified but don't always talk to each other. I wish there would be closer integration between the solution and the vendors when either release new upgrades to their product line. Often we find issues on either end post upgrades.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Content caching and content compression are good features."
"It's a good product because it supports all the features that ADC solutions in the market can support, like F5 solutions, for example, such as the LTM of F5."
"Although FortiADC has multiple features that I like, the global DNS is the most helpful. It is primarily useful for customers with huge environments and at least two data centers. FortiADC can act as your DNS server. It can check which data center has the lowest latency, and route traffic to that one. It's an intelligent DNS."
"Fortinet FortiADC is a good product because each and every piece of content is monitored by it."
"The GSLB, the DR side, is the best part. Because we had our main side in one city, we created another, and we had a complete MPLS over the internet. We used the GSLB and data loss for our business applications."
"The main feature that we use is GSLB (Global Server Load Balancing). GSLB makes the customer's network more reliable by scaling applications across multiple datacenters. GSLB as a disaster recovery solution can direct traffic based on site availability."
"We can do patches offline without causing customers outages. The web application firewall features, especially those related to the OWASP Top Ten, provide automated protections. This allows more flexibility in patching the backend applications. Additionally, it offers visibility into the requests being made to the applications, and you can't protect what you can't see."
"The solution provides high-level services such as availability, redundancy, and load balancing between servers."
"Loadbalancer is easy to use. It performs well, with low latency."
"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."
"Existing customers are trying to migrate from the physical F5 load balancer to the AVI load balancer because it is scalable and easily managed."
"Load balancing helps us distribute both incoming and outgoing data loads evenly among the servers, preventing overload on a single server."
"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."
"It helps us to route the traffic to the available servers. If we didn't have Loadbalancer we would fail to set the end-user and it would cause a failure in the cluster."
"It does what it’s supposed to do which is balancing an important intranet site we are using, so if one server dies, the second becomes active straight away."
"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

"I think it would be helpful if Fortinet put more video examples on their cookbook site."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"Issues with SSL and encrypted traffic."
"The solution's WAF needs an upgrade because it is not as good as FortiWeb, VMware, F5, or Imperva."
"The configuration is relatively complex."
"It would be good if they built in a fully functional web application firewall."
"There is a mismatch between the number of features they are offering and the device capacity on how much it can handle."
"Technical support and documentation could both be improved."
"​I would like a notification when a new version of the software is available. They told me to sign up for their newsletter, but I have not received any notification for a newer software version.​"
"You can run into an issue when one engineer passes the case over to another engineer after their shift and they don't know what the first engineer worked on up to that point."
"I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly."
"An area for improvement in Loadbalancer.org is that sometimes it works fine, but sometimes, it has issues. The setup for Loadbalancer.org is also complex, so that's another area for improvement."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"It doesn't have the bonding capability feature."
"There are many features you can set in the backend of Loadbalancer. They should simplify the configuration. The administrator should be able to configure it more simply. How it is now, you can only configure it if you have a lot of experience."
"Compared to the physical products, the solution's throughput is a little less."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They offer a perpetual license."
"The product has average pricing. I rate its pricing a five out of ten."
"The solution is less expensive than F5 or Imperva and is the most reasonably priced option available."
"Compared to F5, FortiADC pricing is better."
"The solution's pricing is an issue and should be improved."
"I rate Fortinet FortiADC's pricing one out of ten. It is fixed."
"The product has affordable pricing."
"The price is competitive"
"For now, it's stable."
"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."
"It filled a requirement for our project, and it did so at lesser cost than their competitors.​"
"It was easy to upgrade the license for unlimited clusters and servers. Pricing is fair."
"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."
"They're not the cheapest, not the most expensive, but I think value-wise, they're 100%."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
789,442 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
For ADC, any ADC can do a good job. But in case if you want to add WAF functionality to the same ADC hardware you have to look for other ADC's like F5, Imperva, Radware, Fortinet, etc.
Do you recommend Fortinet FortiADC?
I recommend Fortinet FortiADC. My experience with Fortinet has been very positive. Our company has been using it for around five years. We mainly use FortiADC for the load balancing of application ...
What do you like most about Fortinet FortiADC?
The user interface is very easy and integrates with Sandbox easily.
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 do you like most about Loadbalancer.org?
Existing customers are trying to migrate from the physical F5 load balancer to the AVI load balancer because it is scalable and easily managed.
 

Also Known As

FortiADC Application Delivery Controller, FortiADC
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Black Gold Regional Schools, Amadeus Hospitality, Jefferson County, Chunghwa Telecom, City of Boroondara, Dimension Data
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 Fortinet FortiADC vs. Loadbalancer.org and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
789,442 professionals have used our research since 2012.