We performed a comparison between Barracuda Load Balancer ADC and Citrix NetScaler 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 price is very good, and it's not very expensive."
"Barracuda's technical support is good - whenever we have an issue, they immediately connect and resolve it."
"The solution is extremely stable."
"If you need PCI-compliance and have high security requirements, WAF is the most valuable feature. If you need to monitor your load-balancing services with complex types of monitoring, make sure everything is alright, and load balancing is important, Content Switching and Monitoring features are the keys to your needs. If you want to provide a lot of static images or data, the Caching feature works best for you."
"The solution was very easy to deploy."
"It is simple for both IT specialists and customers."
"Compared to other solutions, Citrix ADC is much more robust in terms of the native integration to cloud platforms. It is far more robust from an operational point of view as well."
"The NetScaler appliance has provided a lot of customers with greater high availability for their enterprise applications within a single site and across multiple locations."
"For NetScaler, our major use cases are database load balancing, PowerVPN VPN access gateway, WAF (Web Application Firewall), and content switching."
"The load balancing feature and the fact that you can do context switching in the WAF are the most valuable. We majorly use it for load balancing, but we also use it for context switching in the WAF. It is also robust and very easy to work with and manage."
"The quality of the solution's performance could be improved."
"Load Balancer ADC is competitively priced, but it's not feature-rich, and its technology is not that advanced."
"Citrix should offer a demo or free-trial version of NetScaler. Several other vendors do, but Citrix does not. Pricing should also be more readily available."
"The GUI should be improved."
"Development team's response time could be better."
"Integration with other third party providers and third party applications could be better because it can be a bit complex at present."
"Manageability and adaptability can also be challenging for end customers."
"We had some bugs in the previous firmware. These were not big issues, but more testing on the firmware would be key to happier customers."
"Scripting and writing expressions need to be improved by putting logic behind the rules and improve policies involving some of the scripting part, which is a tedious task to do."
"The solution should be able to scale more effectively than it does."
Barracuda Load Balancer ADC is ranked 14th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 3 reviews while Citrix NetScaler is ranked 2nd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 85 reviews. Barracuda Load Balancer ADC is rated 7.4, while Citrix NetScaler is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Barracuda Load Balancer ADC writes "Cost-effective but lacking features and integration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Citrix NetScaler writes "Optimizing application delivery and ensuring robust network performance with its excellent stability and comprehensive load-balancing capabilities". Barracuda Load Balancer ADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiADC, Kemp LoadMaster and HAProxy, whereas Citrix NetScaler is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiADC, HAProxy and Array APV Series. See our Barracuda Load Balancer ADC vs. Citrix NetScaler 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.