We performed a comparison between Loadbalancer.org and Radware LinkProof 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."With basic network knowledge, our required system functionality can be configured and maintained."
"Load balancing helps us distribute both incoming and outgoing data loads evenly among the servers, preventing overload on a single server."
"Most important for us that it makes sure that the load is distributed and that we always have access to the end servers."
"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."
"The performance is good."
"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."
"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's pretty much a Swiss Army knife for managing all the load balancing techniques."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof is that it supports link load balance."
"The performance and stability are the most valuable features."
"Provides good performance and scalability."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof for traffic distribution is its DNS management capability."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The solution can be a bit pricey."
"I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly."
"Compared to the physical products, the solution's throughput is a little less."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"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."
"It would be great if there was a way to gain access to the graphing data, to create custom reports. If we had a way to use the graphing data, we could use it to present certain information to our client, such as the uptime status for their service."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"We could enhance the security aspects of the load balancer."
"The solution lacks HA configuration."
"Could have more customizations on the dashboard."
"Radware LinkProof’s customer support could be improved."
"Radware LinkProof's marketing efforts need improvement to raise awareness about its capabilities and compete effectively in the market."
"There are certain features I would like to see in the next release."
Loadbalancer.org is ranked 10th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 22 reviews while Radware LinkProof is ranked 13th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 5 reviews. Loadbalancer.org is rated 8.8, while Radware LinkProof is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Loadbalancer.org writes "Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware LinkProof writes "Supports link load balance and has good stability". Loadbalancer.org is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, HAProxy, Fortinet FortiADC, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Kemp LoadMaster, whereas Radware LinkProof is most compared with Radware Alteon, A10 Networks Thunder ADC, Fortinet FortiADC and HAProxy. See our Loadbalancer.org vs. Radware LinkProof 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.
