We performed a comparison between Amazon Elastic Load Balancing 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."The feature that I like the most is the scalability. The solutions I build often have many pieces, which are very complicated. If a client comes to me with a design, my developer has made this as a template or a cloud formation script. It's a design on paper, and I want it executed a certain way. I can do that quickly and repeatedly with AWS. That is a considerable advantage because I can take that template and do it five times in different zones. That is an excellent feature based on a template, et cetera."
"The solution is very well integrated into Amazon's services."
"It has very good features. It is very configurable. Security with TLS, et cetera is also very easy."
"Amazon Elastic Load Balancing transfers the data securely from servers to users and splits the traffic based on peak times."
"It is straightforward to deploy."
"It is a very scalable solution in which you can add more servers instantly."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon Elastic Load Balancing is scaling."
"Security and monitoring for high-performance applications are some of the top features."
"It is a scalable solution...The installation phase of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is very easy."
"The health probe is pretty good for your backend health. It tells you whether it's communicating and talking to the endpoint correctly. It is quite useful."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Azure Application Gateway are the policies, the data store they are using, and the cloud platform it operates on."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is traffic management."
"The solution was very easy to configure. It wasn't hard at all to adjust it to our needs."
"I find Application Gateway’s WAF module valuable because it helps prevent layer 7 attacks."
"We use the product in front-end and back-end applications to do the load balancing smartly."
"Application Gateway automatically redirects unwanted users and takes care of the security aspect. It also handles the performance side of things, which is why we use it."
"The reporting could be simplified so that the client sees a report of what they cached at the end of the month and the number of hits. It should have metrics above and beyond their Google analytics, etc. You can't do that with the solutions from AWS. You have to build sophisticated cloud trails, reports, dashboards, etc. The setup is significant, and it's hard to manage. You'll need to hire someone or pay a consultant on a regular basis to manage it, and it's not for the faint of heart."
"It would be good if we had a product that integrates well with third-party vendors. Some of our customers want a multi-cloud solution. They don't want to be tied up to or be in just one cloud."
"We faced some issues with the health check."
"The solution needs to guarantee stability because multiple loads behind a load balancer can cause service unavailability."
"The machines created by Amazon Elastic Load Balancing have different IP addresses, which we are not able to whitelist or predict."
"They should improve the solution's pricing."
"The product's stability is an area with a slight shortcoming, which can be improved."
"One issue that we faced with ALB was that leaf-level certificate validation was not happening. It is not that user-friendly in that aspect."
"The tool is a pain to deal with when it comes to the area of configuration."
"The pricing of the solution could be improved. Right now, it's a bit expensive."
"It could be easier to change servicing."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
"Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is harder to manage than Imperva. It is not intuitive and stable compared to other products."
"Implementing and standardizing the solution across the IT landscape in a heterogeneous environment is painful."
"We have encountered some issues with automatic redirection and cancellation, leading to 502 and 504 gateway errors. So, I experienced some trouble with containers."
"Application Gateway’s limitation is that the private and the public endpoint cannot use the same port."
More Amazon Elastic Load Balancing Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Azure Application Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon Elastic Load Balancing is ranked 11th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 9 reviews while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is ranked 4th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 40 reviews. Amazon Elastic Load Balancing is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Amazon Elastic Load Balancing writes "A tool that offers its users resiliency, high availability, and a great scalability". 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". Amazon Elastic Load Balancing is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, HAProxy and NGINX Plus, whereas Microsoft Azure Application Gateway is most compared with AWS WAF, Citrix NetScaler, F5 Advanced WAF, Azure Front Door and NGINX Plus. See our Amazon Elastic Load Balancing 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.
