We performed a comparison between Kemp LoadMaster and Microsoft Azure Application Gateway 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.
"One of the most valuable features I like is the ability to block specific cipher suites like RC4, and older protocols like SSL 3.0."
"It is an easy-to-use, user-friendly interface, and you can set up a new VIP in a couple of minutes."
"Failover is seamless and our services are rock solid."
"Simple to install with good documentation."
"It helps with efficiency and reactivity, in case of assistance needs."
"When the templates are used, there is not much left to configure and they just work!"
"The feature I find most valuable is load balancing with different algorithms."
"Exchange load balancing and reverse proxy for Skype for Business are key features."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"The solution's most valuable feature is an HTTP solution and SSL certificate. It is also easy to use."
"We find it valuable because it is compatible with our existing Azure solution."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is its ease of use."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway gives us a lot of benefits, including domain mapping."
"It has a filter available, although we are not currently using it because it is not part of our requirements. But it is a good option and when it becomes part of our requirements we will definitely use it."
"The pricing is quite good."
"We can control what rules should be used and what should be disabled."
"It would be helpful if there were a way to incorporate tooltips on the fields so that we don't have to dig through documentation."
"In the next release, they can introduce 360 views in the same dashboard to make it easier for users to view. The graphical information should be displayed on the dashboard."
"I want Kemp LoadMaster to provide users with better reporting capabilities in relation to TCP packets. In general, the connections that are present in the system require improvement."
"It would be much easier to have the management interface directly integrate with the Kemp Support library, allowing you to choose the desired template from the online catalog to then directly download to the LoadMaster."
"The product is really good as-is out of the box. If there is one thing I would change is to have the license file not be coupled with the MAC address of the device. This is actually not really useful in a virtual environment where if you have a single VM with KEMP LoadMaster and you have not set up static MAC Address, if you, for example, recreate the VM and just load the disk file on a new VM it will get new MAC address and the NLB will not work as it will not see a proper license."
"If I had to change something it would maybe be to have a little better reporting graphics that show more details in the reporting. It seems to be a little small in the graphic, and I'm not sure if possible but maybe a GUI page that one can use to monitor if any server goes down."
"I would like to see more automation and control of overactive and inactive resources. If I could schedule these around our updates then it would be all automated. I would like to set up an automated script to coincide with the scripts I use to update resources and servers."
"The configuration of the basic services is pretty straight forward but for more complex solutions, there needs to be better documentation or knowledge base articles."
"The solution doesn’t support wildcard-based and regular expression-based rules."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"The solution should provide more security for certificate-based services so that we can implement more security on that."
"It could be more stable, and support could be better. It would also be better if they offered more features. For example, it lacks security features. Before we used another English solution, and we realized that some of the rules were not set up correctly and passed through the Application Gateway's English controllers. But the problem, in this case, is if you send ten rules, for example, six rules hit some issues. IP address blocking could be better. The rules, for example, don't work properly. If you have one issue, one rule or another rule will not work. This sounds like total madness to me."
"The product could be easier to use and implement."
"The solution could improve by increasing the performance when doing updates. For example, if I change the certificate it can take 30 minutes. Other vendors do not have this type of problem."
"The increased security that we are considering is because of some of the things that the security team has brought to our attention. They have pointed out that we would most likely require a better web application firewall than Azure Application Gateway."
"The tool's pricing could be improved."
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Kemp LoadMaster is ranked 6th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 48 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 4th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 38 reviews. Kemp LoadMaster is rated 9.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Kemp LoadMaster writes "Reliable, easy to set up, and can increase your security score". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway writes "High stability with built-in rules that reduce alerts and are easy to configure". Kemp LoadMaster is most compared with HAProxy, NGINX Plus, Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC and Barracuda Web Application Firewall, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with Azure Front Door, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, AWS WAF and Cloudflare Web Application Firewall. See our Kemp LoadMaster vs. Microsoft Azure Application Gateway 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.
