We performed a comparison between Citrix NetScaler 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."High availability, performance, and security are the main pillars. It enhances the security for accessing the applications."
"It is a stable solution. It crashed only once, four years ago...There is a return on investment using the solution."
"The most valuable feature of Citrix ADC is its ease of use."
"HTTP analysis and action. We have a lot of custom web applications that sometimes require custom header insertions. Some of these custom apps are external and, via the content switching, we can use one IP and leverage various back-end web app servers."
"Citrix NetScaler offers robust security features, including SmartAccess and customizable policies, making it a reliable choice for safeguarding user data."
"The best feature of Citrix is its track record of stability in its features."
"What I like most about Citrix NetScaler is its stability, and I didn't see a lot of issues with it."
"It is simple for both IT specialists and customers."
"It reduced the load on our main load balancers."
"HAProxy's TCP load balancer is excellent and super stable."
"The solution is effective in managing our traffic."
"Tech support is super-quick to respond, and always on target with answers specific to the current issue."
"It has allowed us to evenly distribute the load across a number of servers, and check their health and automatically react to errors."
"Load balancing is valuable, and we are also using the WAF feature."
"Performance configuration options with threads, processes, and core stickiness are very valuable."
"The support for all major Linux distros makes running and testing a breeze."
"The interface needs to be improved because the competition is coming up with ones that are more eye-catching, straightforward, and sophisticated."
"Too many bugs in the software and it's always difficult when you need to update."
"Native integration needs to be improved. You cannot build ISE codes natively. For DevOps, integration would be very helpful because it would be a lot simpler from an operational standpoint."
"Citrix should offer a demo or free-trial version of NetScaler. Several other vendors do, but Citrix does not. Pricing should also be more readily available."
"If one device or switch fails, the failover to another device is not seamless which is painful."
"Should offer more flexible cost-effective licensing for small to medium sized organizations."
"Currently, it is not easy to use the configuration capabilities of the product."
"We have issues with the certificates. All authorization processes need certificates, however, every three months we needed to change certificates. This process iss complicated for us because Citrix does not have a not user-friendly interface and does not off user-friendly services. This needs a lot of improvement."
"We've changed solutions as it doesn't fit with our current needs."
"HAProxy is very weak in the logging and monitoring part and requires improvement."
"There is room for improvement in HAProxy's dynamic configuration."
"The product does not have any new technologies."
"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."
"Sometimes it's challenging to get through the log, and you need a log to understand what is going on. It isn't easy to map the logging with the documentation, and every time I read the log, I have to pull out the documentation to understand what I'm reading."
"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."
"The web stats UI, which provides the status of the health and numbers, could greatly benefit from having a RESTful interface to control the load-balanced nodes. Although there is a hack around the UI (by issuing a POST request to HAProxy with parameters), a RESTful interface would greatly improve the automation process (through Chef and Ansible)."
Citrix NetScaler is ranked 2nd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 85 reviews while HAProxy is ranked 3rd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 41 reviews. Citrix NetScaler is rated 8.4, while HAProxy is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Citrix NetScaler writes "Optimizing application delivery and ensuring robust network performance with its excellent stability and comprehensive load-balancing capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HAProxy writes "Useful for for small and quick load-balancing tasks". Citrix NetScaler is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiADC, Loadbalancer.org and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, whereas HAProxy is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Envoy and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). See our Citrix NetScaler 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.