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."The most valuable feature is the SSL offloading capacity."
"The main feature that we use is GSLB (Global Server Load Balancing). GSLB makes the customer's network more reliable by scaling applications across multiple datacenters. GSLB as a disaster recovery solution can direct traffic based on site availability."
"I am impressed with the product's load-balancing feature."
"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."
"Key features include SSL Offloading, VM availability, and L7 load balancing."
"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."
"Load balancing is valuable, and we are also using the WAF feature."
"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."
"Performance configuration options with threads, processes, and core stickiness are very valuable."
"I have found HAProxy very helpful in replicating production environment architecture in a development and testing environment."
"We use it as a load balancer for our application servers."
"I estimate that this product has saved our company hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars in possible downtime from previous load balancers. We make a lot of our money from online sales, so it is critical to have 99.9% uptime."
"Scalable and inexpensive."
"We were able to use HAProxy for round robin with our databases, or for a centralized TCP connection in one host."
"FortiADC is complex to configure so the interface should be improved."
"The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced."
"Fortinet FortiADC should include an advanced-level SD-WAN."
"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."
"The user interface could be more friendly and CLI could be more like that of Fortigate."
"The solution's WAF needs an upgrade because it is not as good as FortiWeb, VMware, F5, or Imperva."
"The configuration is relatively complex."
"Setup could be easier. The company's homework is to redesign those menus to configure with the smallest number of steps."
"While troubleshooting, we are having some difficulties. There are no issues when it is running; it is stable and very good; however, if there is a troubleshooting issue or an incident occurs, we will have issues because this is open-source."
"HAProxy is very weak in the logging and monitoring part and requires improvement."
"Maybe HAProxy could be more modular."
"I would like to evaluate load-balancing algorithms other than round robin and SSL offloading. Also, it would be helpful if I could logically divide the HAProxy load-balancing into multiple entities so that I would install one HA Proxy LB application which could be used for different Web servers for different applications. I am not sure if these features are available."
"Pricing, monitoring, and reports can be improved."
"Sometimes it's challenging to get through the log, and you need a log to understand what is going on. It isn't easy to map the logging with the documentation, and every time I read the log, I have to pull out the documentation to understand what I'm reading."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"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 NGINX Plus, 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.