We performed a comparison between HAProxy and Kemp LoadMaster based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Kemp LoadMaster comes out on top in this comparison. It is a comprehensive and powerful solution with excellent customer support.
"HAProxy potentially has a good return on investment"
"Stability is number one."
"The solution is user-friendly and efficient."
"I can't speak to all of the HAProxy features because we don't use them all, but load balancing is very good."
"The most valuable thing for me is TCP/IP Layer 4 stuff you can do with HAProxy. You can go down to the protocol level and make decisions on something."
"Having the right load balancing solution – which is what HAProxy is – and protection in place gives organizations peace of mind."
"Load balancing is valuable, and we are also using the WAF feature."
"It is scalable."
"The user interface is very easy to work with."
"The most valuable features are synchronizing email with mobile devices and synchronizing with Outlook."
"Failover is seamless and our services are rock solid."
"Mitigates content security policy issues."
"Great web balancing and remote access balancing."
"HAProxy could improve by making the dashboards easier to use, and better reports and administration tickets."
"The solution can be improved by controlling TCP behavior better and mandating to clients what the expected outcome must be in order to avoid receiving contestant timeout logs."
"While troubleshooting, we are having some difficulties. There are no issues when it is running; it is stable and very good; however, if there is a troubleshooting issue or an incident occurs, we will have issues because this is open-source."
"HAProxy could do with some good combination integrations."
"The GUI should be more responsive and show the detailed output of logs."
"We've changed solutions as it doesn't fit with our current needs."
"The reconfigurability in terms of the tooling could be improved and maybe an editor plugin can be added."
"There is no standardized document available. So, any individual has to work from scratch to work it out. If some standard deployment details are available, it would be helpful for people while deploying it. There should be more documentation on the standard deployment."
"Hardware version needs a dual power solution."
"Perhaps Kemp could offer some training videos."
"We have experienced at least one problem with stability, although it was fixed with an upgrade."
"UI is very basic and unattractive."
"It would be much easier to have the management interface directly integrate with the Kemp Support library, allowing you to choose the desired template from the online catalog to then directly download to the LoadMaster."
HAProxy is ranked 5th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 12 reviews while Kemp LoadMaster is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 5 reviews. HAProxy is rated 7.2, while Kemp LoadMaster is rated 9.8. The top reviewer of HAProxy writes "You can go down to the protocol level and make decisions on something". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kemp LoadMaster writes "Easy to set up, reliable, provides seamless failover, and the powerful load balancing capabilities save us money". HAProxy is most compared with NGINX Plus, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Barracuda Web Application Firewall and Fortinet FortiADC, whereas Kemp LoadMaster is most compared with NGINX Plus, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway and Citrix NetScaler. See our HAProxy vs. Kemp LoadMaster 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.
