We performed a comparison between Citrix NetScaler and Loadbalancer.org 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 GSLB feature allows us to move services between data centers. We can do this in either a planned or unplanned manner. We have experienced service provider outages at our primary data center and GSLB will kick in to automatically modify DNS records to point to a secondary data center (active/passive). We also make use of GeoIP information to point clients to the closest data center for accessing applications."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is its load balancing."
"We appreciate that this solution facilitates our access to Citrix internet."
"Manageability and visibility are good."
"SSL Offload"
"Citrix NetScaler offers robust security features, including SmartAccess and customizable policies, making it a reliable choice for safeguarding user data."
"The load balancing is one of the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the content switching."
"Loadbalancer.org is less complex than Citrix."
"Loadbalancer is easy to use. It performs well, with low latency."
"It does what it’s supposed to do which is balancing an important intranet site we are using, so if one server dies, the second becomes active straight away."
"For now, it's stable."
"It helps us to route the traffic to the available servers. If we didn't have Loadbalancer we would fail to set the end-user and it would cause a failure in the cluster."
"The support we have received from Loadbalancer.org has been good."
"With basic network knowledge, our required system functionality can be configured and maintained."
"We have about 30,000 connections going through at any one time and it's fine, it doesn't seem to sweat. It doesn't get overloaded."
"The GUI should be improved."
"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 technical support could be better. Whenever I contacted support, I rarely got the solution that we needed. And most of the time, I finished fixing the problem by looking on the internet or by finding documents about the problem on Google."
"The product provides some templates to integrate with applications like MS Exchange, MS SharePoint, SAP Enterprise Portal, and others. However, the last update for these templates was 2013 (lots of applications are running on versions newer then 2013)."
"Finding relevant documentation for learning NetScaler can be challenging, especially for beginners who prefer a web interface over command-line interfaces."
"Technical support sometimes takes a little longer because of the multilevel ticket priority."
"Needs configuration processes like disabling LB VIPs, automatically disabling the IPs used."
"We face challenges with the solution's firmware upgrades frequently."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"I would like a notification when a new version of the software is available. They told me to sign up for their newsletter, but I have not received any notification for a newer software version."
"The interface from Loadbalancer.org should be improved."
"Compared to the physical products, the solution's throughput is a little less."
"Originally we had some stability issues with it, so they replaced it with a new box and it's fine."
"There are many features you can set in the backend of Loadbalancer. They should simplify the configuration. The administrator should be able to configure it more simply. How it is now, you can only configure it if you have a lot of experience."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"If I have to say something, I suppose they could add an automated configuration backup to an FTP location (or something similar) so you don’t have to manually do it. I don’t see this as a problem, of course, as the configuration rarely changes and we only need one backup, but maybe for other users that feature would be handy."
Citrix NetScaler is ranked 2nd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 85 reviews while Loadbalancer.org is ranked 10th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 22 reviews. Citrix NetScaler is rated 8.4, while Loadbalancer.org is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Citrix NetScaler writes "Optimizing application delivery and ensuring robust network performance with its excellent stability and comprehensive load-balancing capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Loadbalancer.org writes "Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised ". Citrix NetScaler is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiADC, HAProxy and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, whereas Loadbalancer.org is most compared with HAProxy, Fortinet FortiADC, F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Kemp LoadMaster and NGINX Plus. See our Citrix NetScaler vs. Loadbalancer.org 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.
