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 load balancing is one of the most valuable features."
"My customers have told me that the performance of this solution is good."
"I find all of it to be valuable, because of the flexibility that is built into this product."
"The web application firewalling component is a powerful feature."
"What I like most about Citrix NetScaler is its stability, and I didn't see a lot of issues with it."
"Provides resiliency for applications that reside on servers, as well as connectivity to remote applications."
"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 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."
"I think there is always room for improvement in this type of solutions. For example, I think the GUI should be easy to understand."
"Currently, it is not easy to use the configuration capabilities of the product."
"Citrix should improve the documentation. It is not really clear how to set up many features to our advantage. When we setup Citrix NetScaler ADC, we have to figure it out by ourselves without a lot of documentation."
"The solution should be able to scale more effectively than it does."
"Development team's response time could be better."
"It was challenging explaining to customers that it's no longer NetScaler but ADC, and now it's not just ADC but also the rebranding from NetScaler."
"The solution is a bit more expensive than some of the available solutions in this region. One solution in particular that I noticed was cheaper was Kemp."
"Too many bugs in the software and it's always difficult when you need to update."
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.