We performed a comparison between Citrix NetScaler and Kemp LoadMaster 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 most valuable feature of Citrix NetScaler was the seamless integration. Additionally, the UI is good."
"It is simple for both IT specialists and customers."
"For NetScaler, our major use cases are database load balancing, PowerVPN VPN access gateway, WAF (Web Application Firewall), and content switching."
"The most valuable feature of Citrix ADC is its ease of use."
"Content Redirection and SSO integration with Citrix XenApp/XenDesktop. The GUI was wonderful."
"The maintenance of the solution is not complex."
"High availability, performance, and security are the main pillars. It enhances the security for accessing the applications."
"The solution is very stable."
"Load-balancing is a great feature that is very easy to configure and it is always working fine."
"The security features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The most valuable feature so far has been the high-availability options that allowed us to add an additional Kemp LoadMaster VLM virtual appliance into our VMware vSphere environment, to provide failover for our existing LoadMaster."
"It helps with efficiency and reactivity, in case of assistance needs."
"The pricing of the solution is valuable."
"I like the way this solution handles multiple SSLs in different domains while still load balancing."
"The Global WAF has saved us more than one time from unwanted traffic."
"We are most impressed with the ease of use and great support."
"We are looking for some in-depth monitoring and analytics and more information that Citrix Director doesn't provide. ControlUp has insights that not only give you an overview but also allow you to do some drill-down troubleshooting for what's going on in your environment. We are looking for some more analytical and monitoring data to be able to monitor the environment better, not only from an application standpoint but also from the standpoint of the infrastructure to everything it sits on. They can provide more data to the administrators about what's going on within the application. They can provide data not only on the application side but also about what the application sits on. They're making strides with Citrix Analytics in regards to that."
"Technical support sometimes takes a little longer because of the multilevel ticket priority."
"Does not include security. A web application firewall would be a nice addition."
"The setup for Citrix NetScaler has room for improvement. It could be easier."
"Integration with other third party providers and third party applications could be better because it can be a bit complex at present."
"Improvements are needed to address the issue of machines becoming unregistered, ensuring stability for end users. Troubleshooting with Citrix support can be challenging, so clearer diagnostics would be beneficial. As for global server load balancing, it works well on-premises, depending on user volume and service stability. Overall, it's satisfactory for us."
"The technical support has room for improvement."
"Citrix ADC can be really complex. It isn't very simple like some other appliances that I've worked with. You need a lot of skill and experience to manage it. I'm not talking about a year or two. You need at least four years to understand it very well. It is not that easy to learn. They should make it a lot simpler for users to understand the management of it. They can also provide some additional training. The material they have on the site is not sufficient enough for you to understand how to manage it. Their training is expensive, and not everyone has the funds and experience for it. Citrix isn't very popular around these parts of the world. So, it can use some more marketing, sales, enlightenment, and advertisement. These could bring more market for them. Basically, there are just a few companies that really go for Citrix. Most of the companies go for VMware because they marketed themselves more than Citrix. There isn't much difference between Citrix and VMware. VMware is a little more robust than Citrix. Citrix has focused more on desktops rather than server virtualization, and that's the advantage VMware has over Citrix. Citrix also needs to educate and inform users about the infrastructure that is supported with a version. Currently, if the customers don't look at the datasheet, they might miss this important information."
"The product could be improved by making the SSL Offloading easier."
"The ability to see live traffic is not great and can be improved."
"It lacks an officially supported, well-written SCOM Management Pack."
"It would be nice if the historical metrics were easily exportable from the interface."
"Over the last several major versions, the GUI has remained virtually unchanged and still seems lacking."
"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."
"The only thing that I miss is that the TMG server was giving me live information about who is connected and what is the request about."
"Third, the password history restriction needs improvement. For example, the password policy will restrict the user to always use a unique password combination. The password should not be reused for a minimum of three generations of passwords."
Citrix NetScaler is ranked 2nd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 85 reviews while Kemp LoadMaster is ranked 6th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 48 reviews. Citrix NetScaler is rated 8.4, while Kemp LoadMaster is rated 9.4. 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 Kemp LoadMaster writes "Reliable, easy to set up, and can increase your security score". Citrix NetScaler is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiADC, HAProxy and Barracuda Web Application Firewall, whereas Kemp LoadMaster is most compared with HAProxy, NGINX Plus, Fortinet FortiADC, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and A10 Networks Thunder ADC. See our Citrix NetScaler vs. Kemp LoadMaster 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.
