We performed a comparison between HAProxy and Loadbalancer.org 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."Having the right load balancing solution – which is what HAProxy is – and protection in place gives organizations peace of mind."
"HAProxy's TCP load balancer is excellent and super stable."
"The ability to handle a sequence of front- and back-ends gives the user the opportunity to send traffic through different services."
"Tech support is super-quick to respond, and always on target with answers specific to the current issue."
"Software defined load balancing allows us to dynamically adjust and codify routing decisions. This speeds up development."
"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."
"The ease of use of the configuration, and great documentation, are the most valuable features for us."
"The anti-DDOS PacketShield filtering solution (embedded in the physical appliances) as well as the BGP route injection are great features and heavily used."
"The SSL Layer 7 load balancing is valuable."
"Most important for us that it makes sure that the load is distributed and that we always have access to the end servers."
"With basic network knowledge, our required system functionality can be configured and maintained."
"The connection that this solution helps our servers maintain has been most useful."
"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."
"Load balancing helps us distribute both incoming and outgoing data loads evenly among the servers, preventing overload on a single server."
"Existing customers are trying to migrate from the physical F5 load balancer to the AVI load balancer because it is scalable and easily managed."
"I found scalability in Loadbalancer.org valuable."
"There are three main areas to improve: 1) Make remote management more modern by adding API. 2) Propose a general HA solution for HAProxy (no I'm using keepalived for this). 3) Thread option should be a bit more stable."
"Dynamic update API. More things should be possible to be configured during runtime."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"We've changed solutions as it doesn't fit with our current needs."
"Pricing, monitoring, and reports can be improved."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model. It could be cheaper."
"Documentation could be improved."
"Maybe HAProxy could be more modular."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"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."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"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."
"The interface from Loadbalancer.org should be improved."
"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."
"It doesn't have the bonding capability feature."
"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."
HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 39 reviews while Loadbalancer.org is ranked 10th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 22 reviews. HAProxy is rated 8.2, while Loadbalancer.org is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Offers good integration capabilities but needs to improve the monitoring part". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Loadbalancer.org writes "Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised ". HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Istio, whereas Loadbalancer.org is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Kemp LoadMaster and NGINX Plus. See our HAProxy vs. Loadbalancer.org 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.