We performed a comparison between Kemp LoadMaster and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway 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.
"Failover is seamless and our services are rock solid."
"Great web balancing and remote access balancing."
"When you configure the listening services, you can implement a lot of security features like the Edge Security Pack that intercepts the requests and processes those before they are sent to the real servers."
"It has greatly fortified the performance and uptime of our front-door email ingress, simplified and segmented mail routing, and reduced admin overhead for mail issue resolution and troubleshooting."
"Using Kemp as a front-facing service appliance, it allows me to have the flexibility of swapping out real servers behind the scenes without any intervention from my network team."
"The feature I find most valuable is load balancing with different algorithms."
"The base feature of Kemp LoadMaster load balancing ticks all the boxes but the most valuable features would be the security features Intrusion Prevention (IPS) and Web Application Firewall (WAF)."
"The configuration is really easy and the web portal is self-explanatory."
"I rate Microsoft Azure Application Gateway's scalability a ten out of ten. My company has more than 1000 users who use it daily."
"In my experience, Microsoft products have a smooth integration and facilitate easy management and monitoring. Using Azure Application Gateway allows us to efficiently handle the system loads."
"We chose this solution in the first place because it has access to Layer 7. I can control the requests and the content, which I can access on my network if I want to even if it's forbidden access to other external resources. If I want to monitor, for example, traffic, and apply this rule on Layer 7, I can do so. This was our main goal when implementing this application. We wanted to take advantage of the Gateway capabilities."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"Good customization; able to report and take action on alerts."
"The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly."
"It would be very helpful to get all the http/https session logs by default in the log monitor without activating debugging mode like an apache web sever natively does"
"I think there should be more visual instructions on how to configure advanced features."
"Some documentation is out of date versus the new version, and things have been moved."
"The GUI is rather technical and complex, so it could be improved by making it simpler and more user-friendly."
"I would like to see more automation and control of overactive and inactive resources. If I could schedule these around our updates then it would be all automated. I would like to set up an automated script to coincide with the scripts I use to update resources and servers."
"To make it a perfect ten out of ten it would need better connection logging. If there is an active connection, that there is better logging. It should also have better management monitoring tools."
"SNMP and/or RESTCONF management, in order to collect many counters, for plotting in a central application need to be improved."
"I really don't like the way the logs are presented in the software."
"The solution has many limitations. You cannot upgrade the VPN to the application gateway. So I started with version one, which has limited capabilities, and they provided version two. And unfortunately, I cannot upgrade from v one to v two like other services. So I have to decommission the version one and create a new one with version two. Also the version one was complex with the certificates uploading the SQL certificates."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
"The solution should provide more security for certificate-based services so that we can implement more security on that."
"The solution could improve by increasing the performance when doing updates. For example, if I change the certificate it can take 30 minutes. Other vendors do not have this type of problem."
"We have encountered some issues with automatic redirection and cancellation, leading to 502 and 504 gateway errors. So, I experienced some trouble with containers."
"The tool is a pain to deal with when it comes to the area of configuration."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"It could be more stable, and support could be better. It would also be better if they offered more features. For example, it lacks security features. Before we used another English solution, and we realized that some of the rules were not set up correctly and passed through the Application Gateway's English controllers. But the problem, in this case, is if you send ten rules, for example, six rules hit some issues. IP address blocking could be better. The rules, for example, don't work properly. If you have one issue, one rule or another rule will not work. This sounds like total madness to me."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kemp LoadMaster is ranked 6th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 48 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 4th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews. Kemp LoadMaster is rated 9.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Kemp LoadMaster writes "Reliable, easy to set up, and can increase your security score". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". Kemp LoadMaster is most compared with HAProxy, NGINX Plus, Fortinet FortiADC, Citrix NetScaler and Barracuda Web Application Firewall, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Citrix NetScaler, AWS WAF, Cloudflare Web Application Firewall and Azure Front Door. See our Kemp LoadMaster vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway 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.
