We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiADC and HAProxy 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 the solution's load balance with DNS intelligence."
"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."
"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."
"Ease of use in deploying and having it up and running requires minimal knowledge."
"The product has flexible and interesting licensing options."
"Simple to use and easy to integrate."
"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."
"The technical support has been, in one word, perfect. Every time I call, I’m on the phone with a representative within five minutes who is highly skilled and willing to help, whether in the case of critical issues or simple advice."
"It is scalable."
"It is stable. Period. Will not fail unless you do something wrong."
"The solution is effective in managing our traffic."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable is that it works for my use case of application load balancing. I'm using it for PeerSense, and it's easy enough for PeerSense."
"It is a crucial tool in ensuring smooth service provision without any interruptions."
"The most valuable feature of HAProxy is that its open source."
"Having the right load balancing solution – which is what HAProxy is – and protection in place gives organizations peace of mind."
"Fortinet has some drawbacks, and it can be a bit challenging to scale."
"The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced."
"It would be good if they built in a fully functional web application firewall."
"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."
"The initial setup could be simplified."
"Technical support and documentation could both be improved."
"Setup could be easier. The company's homework is to redesign those menus to configure with the smallest number of steps."
"There are three main areas to improve: 1) Make remote management more modern by adding API. 2) Propose a general HA solution for HAProxy (no I'm using keepalived for this). 3) Thread option should be a bit more stable."
"If nbproc = 2, you will have two processes of HAProxy running. However, the stats of HAProxy will not be aggregated, meaning you don't really know the collective status in a single point of view."
"Dynamic update API. More things should be possible to be configured during runtime."
"The basic clustering is not usable in our very specific setup. The clustering is mainly a configuration replication and is great in a case of active-passive usage. In the case of an active-active (or with more than two nodes) where the configuration is not fully identical, it cannot be used as-is."
"The logging functionality could use improvement, as it is a little cryptic."
"I would like to see better search handling, and a user interface, with a complete functional graphical unit"
"We've changed solutions as it doesn't fit with our current needs."
"We need to handle new connections by dropping, or queuing them while the HAProxy restarts, and because HAProxy does not handle split config files."
Fortinet FortiADC is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 19 reviews while HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews. Fortinet FortiADC is rated 7.8, while HAProxy is rated 8.2. 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 HAProxy writes "Useful for for small and quick load-balancing tasks". Fortinet FortiADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiWeb, Citrix NetScaler, Kemp LoadMaster and Loadbalancer.org, whereas HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Amazon Elastic Load Balancing. See our Fortinet FortiADC vs. HAProxy 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.
