We performed a comparison between Kemp LoadMaster and NGINX Plus 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."The DNS Load Balancer makes it so that I don't have to worry about site failures."
"The most beneficial function of using the ADC is to ensure this resiliency."
"The most valuable features for us are the Load Balancing and Web Application Firewall, as we have a lot of web applications."
"The configuration is really easy and the web portal is self-explanatory."
"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)."
"Failover is seamless and our services are rock solid."
"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."
"When I worked in a security research center, we tested NGINX to support DoS and DDoS attacks, and its results were great."
"It's lightweight software that can handle heavy loads efficiently."
"The product is resilient."
"I need to highlight that the number one thing about NGINX is that it is free."
"The product is lightweight and fast."
"I think installation only took a couple of minutes — no more than 10 minutes."
"This solution has everything."
"The flexibility of its modules allow it to be scalable."
"There is room for improvement in the stability of the solution."
"I definitely think that the WAF can be improved."
"SNMP and/or RESTCONF management, in order to collect many counters, for plotting in a central application need to be improved."
"They were still in the process of development, and for example, we set it up in a cluster. So it was one logistical unit built out of two physical devices. And the expected behavior, which I know from other devices, will be formed into a logic cluster. It's that you configure one unit. Then you bring the second unit into this cluster with the already configured primary unit. So the secondary box pulls all the configured ones from its neighbor, does everything automatically, and then synchronizes with this primary neighbor. And then it works, like, one logical unit. And this didn't work with the Kemp's initially, where they caused a lot of issues when building up a cluster, so there were some specials on how to set this up. When we built or set them up for the first time and the months afterward with no new software releases, there were a couple of problems, but in the end, they worked fine. So, they developed a lot and learned from what they've responded to, what we responded to them, and what needs fixing."
"When we go serverless, we may again have to revisit this because the configuration needs to be changed. With this change, we can run into a lot of other configurations that we haven't got into, which involve additional expenses. It would be challenging to convince management to buy at that price point. It would be a balancing act of justifying that expense and the value, that is, how it is going to save a bit of time and make our platform secure. It can have better configuration ability. A lot of iterations happen when we have multiple servers pointing to the same domain. If we do not orchestrate carefully, it gets into a loop, which takes away the precious time of the user who is trying to subscribe to a service. It takes a little longer time to realize services as well as web pages."
"I really don't like the way the logs are presented in the software."
"Certificate installations could be simplified and modernized, and allowed to be monitored for expirations/issues."
"It would be nice if the historical metrics were easily exportable from the interface."
"The biggest room for improvement would be to allow NGINX Core machines to cluster for memory zones in some way with a plug and play module. "
"Make modules easier to enable or disable. The beauty and ugly side of the NGINX modules is you have to know how to compile the module. For beginners or non-very technical aspirant(s) going for NGINX, they have to learn how to compile the modules."
"I would suggest adding GUI-based configuration panels to NGINX Plus to simplify setup and management tasks."
"The KPI should be more focused on load balancing and the latency in application calling from the end system."
"NGINX Plus is moderately priced, but it could give better value for money."
"The center management system could be improved."
"Improvement needed in NGINX Plus could focus on optimizing memory usage for users."
"Lack of a feature to print data on the terminal for verification of network traffic during debugging and testing."
Kemp LoadMaster is ranked 6th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 48 reviews while NGINX Plus is ranked 5th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 28 reviews. Kemp LoadMaster is rated 9.4, while NGINX Plus is rated 8.8. 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 NGINX Plus writes "Quick installation and very easy to manage while doing orchestration or automation". Kemp LoadMaster is most compared with HAProxy, Fortinet FortiADC, Citrix NetScaler, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, whereas NGINX Plus is most compared with IIS, HAProxy, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Apache Web Server and Citrix NetScaler. See our Kemp LoadMaster vs. NGINX Plus 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.
