We performed a comparison between Citrix NetScaler 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."I like app flows and custom flows. They integrate with multiple flows."
"Load Balancing and SSL offloading are key features."
"One feature that works really well is the SSL VPN. It's very easy to set up and you can go very granular with it. You can define what user groups get what kind of access and the management overhead is very low."
"The web application firewalling component is a powerful feature."
"For desktop application management, I recommend the NetScaler edition. This product is like a Swiss army knife. Citrix NetScaler ADC supports the education front-end."
"The solution is very stable. We don't have any downtime or issues of that nature."
"The web application firewall is one feature I found valuable in the solution."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is its load balancing."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof for traffic distribution is its DNS management capability."
"Provides good performance and scalability."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The performance and stability are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof is that it supports link load balance."
"The solution can improve their support and send tickets directly to a Citrix ADC engineer in order to avoid having to escalate each support call."
"ADC from Citrix has added functionalities from other products and the usability is very difficult for someone who is used to a simpler user interface, it's a little bit of a mess to use."
"We face challenges with the solution's firmware upgrades frequently."
"The solution is a bit more expensive than some of the available solutions in this region. One solution in particular that I noticed was cheaper was Kemp."
"Technical support could be improved."
"Manageability and adaptability can also be challenging for end customers."
"Citrix ADC is a complex product, and it takes time to understand these things. But the documentation is poor, and the deployment is difficult. Integration could also be better because what I find is that you cannot easily integrate the panel in the second sector. What I have found is that in the last index, there is a limitation when getting validated. Technical support could also be better."
"I think the documentation should be improved."
"Radware LinkProof's marketing efforts need improvement to raise awareness about its capabilities and compete effectively in the market."
"Radware LinkProof’s customer support could be improved."
"There are certain features I would like to see in the next release."
"The solution lacks HA configuration."
"Could have more customizations on the dashboard."
Citrix NetScaler is ranked 2nd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 85 reviews while Radware LinkProof is ranked 13th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 5 reviews. Citrix NetScaler is rated 8.4, while Radware LinkProof is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Citrix NetScaler writes "Optimizing application delivery and ensuring robust network performance with its excellent stability and comprehensive load-balancing capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware LinkProof writes "Supports link load balance and has good stability". Citrix NetScaler is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiADC, HAProxy and Loadbalancer.org, whereas Radware LinkProof is most compared with Radware Alteon, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and Fortinet FortiADC. See our Citrix NetScaler 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.