We performed a comparison between HAProxy and Radware Alteon 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."HAProxy Enterprise Edition has been rock solid. We have essentially had no downtime caused by our load balancers in the last 10 months, because they’ve worked so well. Previously, our load balancers caused us multiple hours per year in downtime."
"The most important features would be the load-balancing of HTTP and TCP requests, according to multiple LB-algorithms (busyness, weighted-busyness, round robin, traffic, etc). Another important feature that we cannot live without is the username/passwd authentication for legacy systems that had none."
"I have found HAProxy very helpful in replicating production environment architecture in a development and testing environment."
"We use it as a load balancer for our application servers."
"Tech support is super-quick to respond, and always on target with answers specific to the current issue."
"Load balancing is valuable, and we are also using the WAF feature."
"What I like best about the product is its simplicity and speed. When you need to set up a load balancer quickly, HAProxy offers options like sticky sessions and round-robin. It's also fast to configure, including adding SSL for security. While it may have fewer options than other solutions like F5, HAProxy gets the job done for basic load-balancing tasks."
"Reliability. HAProxy is the most reliable product I have ever used."
"It is easy to expand. Our clients are enterprise-size."
"Security is one of the most valuable features that I like. It is easy to use and easy to configure."
"I found the link load balancer and server load balancer are the most valuable."
"A user-friendly and reasonably priced solution."
"The device blocks threats and allows legitimate users to work correctly."
"The command line interface is simple and very user-friendly."
"The most valuable aspect is that it establishes user security."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its stability. During the time that I have been using it, it has not undergone a service failure... And with the integrated application protection, we have not suffered from attacks anymore."
"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."
"HAProxy could improve by making the dashboards easier to use, and better reports and administration tickets."
"The solution can be improved by controlling TCP behavior better and mandating to clients what the expected outcome must be in order to avoid receiving contestant timeout logs."
"Improving the documentation with multiple examples and scenarios would be beneficial. Most users encounter similar situations, so having a variety of scenarios readily available on the tool's website would be helpful. For instance, if I were part of the HAProxy team, I'd create a webpage with different scenarios and provide files for each scenario. This way, users wouldn't have to start from scratch every time."
"The product does not have any new technologies."
"We would like to see dynamic ACL and port update support. Our infrastructure relies on randomly allocated ports and this feature would allow us to update without restarting the process."
"It needs proper HTTP/2 support."
"Pricing, monitoring, and reports can be improved."
"The GUI needs to be improved. Right now, the solution isn't so user-friendly."
"We’d like the solution to include more security features in the standard license."
"The user interface can be improved."
"The service could be improved by better customer support."
"We are having a difficult time with the security module, and how to implement the Radware security."
"The community portal does not have a place to find scripts."
"A feature that I would like to see included in the next version might be a better analysis when working with crypt issues. Right now, it is very manual; you load it into Alteon and it runs. It would be interesting to see a more dynamic process."
"Performance could be improved."
HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews while Radware Alteon is ranked 7th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 33 reviews. HAProxy is rated 8.2, while Radware Alteon is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Offers good integration capabilities but needs to improve the monitoring part". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Alteon writes "It's a good fit for a small team because the maintenance is easier and you don't need to know how to code". HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Citrix NetScaler and Traefik Enterprise, whereas Radware Alteon is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and Fortinet FortiWeb. See our HAProxy vs. Radware Alteon 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.
