We performed a comparison between Kemp LoadMaster 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 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."
"The most valuable feature is the load balancing and allowing for high availability of our web services."
"LoadMaster is easy to deploy and understand."
"The DNS Load Balancer makes it so that I don't have to worry about site failures."
"It has been functional. We don't have any outages."
"The solution is easy to configure when changing the load balancing method to Round Robin or least connection."
"When the templates are used, there is not much left to configure and they just work!"
"With Kemp 360 Central, our customers get a nice overview of their Kemp products and an easy way to upgrade firmware on all devices from a single interface."
"The simplicity of the solution and its ability to integrate easily with others are its most valuable aspects."
"WAF feature replicates the firewall."
"The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use."
"Load balancing and web application firewall features are the most valuable."
"Some of the key features of this solution are the low-level maintenance required, floating proxy service, and load balancing."
"It does an excellent job of load balancing."
"It is a scalable solution...The installation phase of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is very easy."
"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."
"I definitely think that the WAF can be improved."
"We have experienced at least one problem with stability, although it was fixed with an upgrade."
"I think there should be more visual instructions on how to configure advanced features."
"If you want logging for SMTP traffic, you have to enable ESP, which requires you to define allowed IP addresses. That’s irritating, to say the least."
"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."
"So far, the only hitch we have run into is that would have been nice to have an easier method to add allow/whitelist entries into the Access Control lists for virtual services."
"Some documentation is out of date versus the new version, and things have been moved."
"There is room for improvement in the stability of the solution."
"I want the solution's support to improve. The tool is also expensive."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"Needs easier integration with the existing SIAM."
"The product's performance should be better."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
"The support provided for the solution has certain shortcomings that need improvement, especially when it comes to the response time from the support team."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
"The solution should provide more security for certificate-based services so that we can implement more security on that."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kemp LoadMaster is ranked 6th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 48 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 4th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 38 reviews. Kemp LoadMaster is rated 9.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. 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 Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". Kemp LoadMaster is most compared with HAProxy, NGINX Plus, Fortinet FortiADC, Citrix NetScaler and Barracuda Web Application Firewall, 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 Kemp LoadMaster 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.
