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."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."
"The product has flexible and interesting licensing options."
"From a technical perspective, it is the most scalable device from Fortinet."
"I am impressed with the product's load-balancing feature."
"Fortinet FortiADC is a good product because each and every piece of content is monitored by it."
"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."
"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 most valuable feature is the SSL offloading capacity."
"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."
"It is stable. Period. Will not fail unless you do something wrong."
"It solves a problem for me where I can build files, not based on the health of the check, but rather the speed of the check."
"Performance configuration options with threads, processes, and core stickiness are very valuable."
"Having the right load balancing solution – which is what HAProxy is – and protection in place gives organizations peace of mind."
"It is a crucial tool in ensuring smooth service provision without any interruptions."
"The support for all major Linux distros makes running and testing a breeze."
"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."
"The initial setup could be simplified."
"The L7 Persistent load-balancing algorithm has not worked for me after having tested it many times with my customer's in-house application. I'd like to suggest that the company make sure that all load-balancing algorithms work properly with most applications, even those that are in-house apps."
"Technical support and documentation could both be improved."
"The solution should improve finding false positives and false negatives. There are a lot of false positives."
"It would be good if they built in a fully functional web application firewall."
"I had a terrible experience with Fortinet support. I only used support once when I bought the solution. I got no response for two days. However, I believe that it's no longer the case. Fortinet solutions have problems when they're launched. For example, we had issues with Fortinet's authenticator when it came out. We also had trouble with FortiNAC in the beginning."
"The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced."
"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."
"HAProxy could improve by making the dashboards easier to use, and better reports and administration tickets."
"They should introduce one feature that I know many people, including me, are waiting for: HAProxy should have provide hot-swipe for back-end servers. Also, they need a more detailed GUI for monitoring and configuration."
"The logging functionality could use improvement, as it is a little cryptic."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"The configuration should be more friendly, perhaps with a Web interface. For example, I work with the ClusterControl product for Severalnines, and we have a Web interface to deploy the HAProxy load-balancer."
"The only area that I can see needing improvement is the management interface, since it is pretty much all through the CLI or configuration. A GUI/web interface could be helpful for users who are not as experienced in the Linux shell. However, HAProxy does have another product that we evaluated called ALOHA, which has a web front-end, but we found it did not meet our needs."
"The reconfigurability in terms of the tooling could be improved and maybe an editor plugin can be added."
Fortinet FortiADC is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 19 reviews while HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 39 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 "Offers good integration capabilities but needs to improve the monitoring part". Fortinet FortiADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiWeb, Citrix NetScaler, Kemp LoadMaster and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, 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.