We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiADC 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.
"From a technical perspective, it is the most scalable device from Fortinet."
"The solution provides high-level services such as availability, redundancy, and load balancing between servers."
"Because ADC is the intermediary between the servers and the end-user application, it gives thorough information about the traffic, what the problem is."
"Simple to use and easy to integrate."
"TSL and SSL offloading are both very good features."
"I like the solution's load balance with DNS intelligence."
"Although FortiADC has multiple features that I like, the global DNS is the most helpful. It is primarily useful for customers with huge environments and at least two data centers. FortiADC can act as your DNS server. It can check which data center has the lowest latency, and route traffic to that one. It's an intelligent DNS."
"The GSLB, the DR side, is the best part. Because we had our main side in one city, we created another, and we had a complete MPLS over the internet. We used the GSLB and data loss for our business applications."
"We are most impressed with the ease of use and great support."
"Great web balancing and remote access balancing."
"The most valuable feature that I found is the load balancing feature, it is the core function of the product."
"The security features, load balancing, built-in templates, and the easy to implement virtual IPs are great."
"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."
"There is a simplicity to the setup and configuration."
"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."
"I like that this is a Network Load Balancer that can be used practically with any application in the backend. They have how-to guides on how to set up Kemp NLB with Exchange, but you can use it as well for Sharepoint, RDS, or any other back end server."
"The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced."
"I had a terrible experience with Fortinet support. I only used support once when I bought the solution. I got no response for two days. However, I believe that it's no longer the case. Fortinet solutions have problems when they're launched. For example, we had issues with Fortinet's authenticator when it came out. We also had trouble with FortiNAC in the beginning."
"The solution should improve finding false positives and false negatives. There are a lot of false positives."
"The configuration is relatively complex."
"I think it would be helpful if Fortinet put more video examples on their cookbook site."
"Technical support and documentation could both be improved."
"The solution's WAF needs an upgrade because it is not as good as FortiWeb, VMware, F5, or Imperva."
"There is a mismatch between the number of features they are offering and the device capacity on how much it can handle."
"We have experienced at least one problem with stability, although it was fixed with an upgrade."
"I want to have the ability to pull a particular server. The DevOps portion was challenging for me, like if I needed to redirect from one IP to another URL. I needed to look that up, and the knowledge base is not well organized. When I look for information about Kemp on the Internet, I don't find many articles or something like that."
"It would be nice if the historical metrics were easily exportable from the interface."
"The auth website of ESP is really lacking. It’s not responsive (mobile friendly) and the procedure of changing the website is difficult. We tend to avoid using pre-auth for that reason."
"The configuration of the basic services is pretty straight forward but for more complex solutions, there needs to be better documentation or knowledge base articles."
"Over the last several major versions, the GUI has remained virtually unchanged and still seems lacking."
"It would be much easier to have the management interface directly integrate with the Kemp Support library, allowing you to choose the desired template from the online catalog to then directly download to the LoadMaster."
"I really don't like the way the logs are presented in the software."
Fortinet FortiADC is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 19 reviews while Kemp LoadMaster is ranked 6th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 48 reviews. Fortinet FortiADC is rated 7.8, while Kemp LoadMaster is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiADC writes "High-level load balancing and routing protocols but scalability is limited to 200 gigabits". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kemp LoadMaster writes "Reliable, easy to set up, and can increase your security score". Fortinet FortiADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiWeb, Citrix NetScaler, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and HAProxy, whereas Kemp LoadMaster is most compared with HAProxy, NGINX Plus, Citrix NetScaler, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and A10 Networks Thunder ADC. See our Fortinet FortiADC 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.
