We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiADC and Radware LinkProof 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 product has flexible and interesting licensing options."
"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."
"Simple to use and easy to integrate."
"Ease of use in deploying and having it up and running requires minimal knowledge."
"Content caching and content compression are good features."
"Fortinet FortiADC is a good product because each and every piece of content is monitored by it."
"From a technical perspective, it is the most scalable device from Fortinet."
"Because ADC is the intermediary between the servers and the end-user application, it gives thorough information about the traffic, what the problem is."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Provides good performance and scalability."
"The performance and stability are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof is that it supports link load balance."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof for traffic distribution is its DNS management capability."
"The configuration is relatively complex."
"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."
"FortiADC is complex to configure so the interface should be improved."
"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."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"I think it would be helpful if Fortinet put more video examples on their cookbook site."
"Setup could be easier. The company's homework is to redesign those menus to configure with the smallest number of steps."
"Radware LinkProof's marketing efforts need improvement to raise awareness about its capabilities and compete effectively in the market."
"There are certain features I would like to see in the next release."
"The solution lacks HA configuration."
"Radware LinkProof’s customer support could be improved."
"Could have more customizations on the dashboard."
Fortinet FortiADC is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 19 reviews while Radware LinkProof is ranked 13th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 5 reviews. Fortinet FortiADC is rated 7.8, while Radware LinkProof is rated 8.8. 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 Radware LinkProof writes "Supports link load balance and has good stability". Fortinet FortiADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiWeb, Citrix NetScaler, Kemp LoadMaster and HAProxy, whereas Radware LinkProof is most compared with Radware Alteon, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and HAProxy. See our Fortinet FortiADC vs. Radware LinkProof 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.
