We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiADC 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."The product has flexible and interesting licensing options."
"The most valuable feature is the SSL offloading capacity."
"I like the solution's load balance with DNS intelligence."
"The solution provides high-level services such as availability, redundancy, and load balancing between servers."
"I am impressed with the product's load-balancing feature."
"It's a good product because it supports all the features that ADC solutions in the market can support, like F5 solutions, for example, such as the LTM of F5."
"Ease of use in deploying and having it up and running requires minimal knowledge."
"Key features include SSL Offloading, VM availability, and L7 load balancing."
"Azure Application Gateway's most valuable feature is ease of use. The configuration is straightforward. It isn't difficult to adjust the size of your instances in the settings. You can do that with a few clicks, and the configuration file is the same way. You can also set rules and policies with minimal time and effort."
"The tool helps manage microservices by providing developers with a platform to conduct tests and assessments on the web application. The custom domain option is one of the most valuable features I've found. This feature is incredibly helpful for the end-users of the web application. With the custom domain feature, you can change the lengthy link to a shorter, more memorable one. For example, instead of using a lengthy default link, you can customize it to something like imail.com, which is much easier to remember and share."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"Good customization; able to report and take action on alerts."
"It does an excellent job of load balancing."
"The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"Fortinet FortiADC should include an advanced-level SD-WAN."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"Technical support and documentation could both be improved."
"There is a mismatch between the number of features they are offering and the device capacity on how much it can handle."
"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."
"Setup could be easier. The company's homework is to redesign those menus to configure with the smallest number of steps."
"Because it is so generic, the documentation requires special attention. A person who has not worked on Fortinet FortiADC or a similar product will struggle to understand what the document is trying to say. The documentation could be more specific, and more detailed."
"I think it would be helpful if Fortinet put more video examples on their cookbook site."
"It is a bit tricky to configure. You've got to have a very specific format to configure it. They should make it a little bit easier to configure. Mapping the certificates into it isn't easy, and it could be better. Currently, you've to write a bit of automation to pull certificates directly to HTTPS."
"In the next release, the solution could improve the integration with Service Mesh and other Azure Security Services."
"Scalability can be an issue."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
"I believe that there is room for improvement in terms of additional functionality. It is an advantage to have features readily available for configuration without needing customer-defined rules."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"The security of the product could be adjusted."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiADC is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 19 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 4th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 40 reviews. Fortinet FortiADC is rated 7.8, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. 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 Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". Fortinet FortiADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiWeb, Citrix NetScaler, Kemp LoadMaster and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Fortinet FortiADC 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.
