Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Fortinet FortiADC vs Loadbalancer.org comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Fortinet FortiADC
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Loadbalancer.org
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
12th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of Fortinet FortiADC is 10.1%, up from 7.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Loadbalancer.org is 3.5%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

Saeid Khanipour Ghobani - PeerSpot reviewer
High-level load balancing and routing protocols but scalability is limited to 200 gigabits
The initial setup and configuration are very easy because the solution includes a simple OS. Initial configuration takes about ten minutes for simple environments. It is important to assess the environment and decide what services, servers, and web applications are needed. The solution can be configured in router mode or one-arm mode which uses source NAT as destination NAT to send traffic to the firewall. One-arm mode is more complex and requires discussions with our engineers. For example, you have a website with Node.js for your programming language, Amazon S3 for your CDN, NGINX for your web server, and you use both React and reCAPTCHA. Our team meets with your developer to learn your website and OS through a multi-step process and then we configure the solution to protect everything.
Roger Seelaender - PeerSpot reviewer
Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised
The solution can be improved with the development of a SIP engine because it is difficult to manage SBCs. All SBCs are really tough to write rules for. If we could put this in front of an SBC to have the right rules to possibly block the traffic, that would be very helpful. The solution can also improve the relationship between Loadbalancer.org and Metaswitch, or now, Microsoft because Metaswitch was purchased by Microsoft. They both position themselves as certified but don't always talk to each other. I wish there would be closer integration between the solution and the vendors when either release new upgrades to their product line. Often we find issues on either end post upgrades.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I am impressed with the product's load-balancing feature."
"From a technical perspective, it is the most scalable device from Fortinet."
"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."
"TSL and SSL offloading are both very good features."
"FortiADC provides load-balancing capabilities needed for integration with other Fortinet platforms."
"The solution provides high-level services such as availability, redundancy, and load balancing between servers."
"Customer service is excellent."
"The user interface is very easy and integrates with Sandbox easily."
"The load balancers have an easy installation and a relatively simple, easy user interface to use."
"We can more easily set up a test environment, because you can easily configure your forms. It makes it more flexible for us, to convert our test environment to a production environment, without having to change DNSs on the outside. You just configure the forms on the inside. So without changing the actual endpoint for the end user, we can create completely different networks in the background."
"With basic network knowledge, our required system functionality can be configured and maintained.​"
"The support we have received from Loadbalancer.org has been good."
"The connection that this solution helps our servers maintain has been most useful."
"For now, it's stable."
"It does what it’s supposed to do which is balancing an important intranet site we are using, so if one server dies, the second becomes active straight away."
"The performance is good."
 

Cons

"Issues with SSL and encrypted traffic."
"The solution needs to integrate sFlow. sFlow provides better visualization of the bandwidth and types of traffic passing through the device. When used in the traffic path, this information can be really useful."
"I think it would be helpful if Fortinet put more video examples on their cookbook site."
"The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced."
"The product's stability for VMs could be better."
"The configuration is relatively complex."
"Technical support and documentation could both be improved."
"There is a mismatch between the number of features they are offering and the device capacity on how much it can handle."
"The solution can be a bit pricey."
"There are many features you can set in the backend of Loadbalancer. They should simplify the configuration. The administrator should be able to configure it more simply. How it is now, you can only configure it if you have a lot of experience."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"Originally we had some stability issues with it, so they replaced it with a new box and it's fine."
"We could enhance the security aspects of the load balancer."
"It would be great if there was a way to gain access to the graphing data, to create custom reports. If we had a way to use the graphing data, we could use it to present certain information to our client, such as the uptime status for their service."
"Compared to the physical products, the solution's throughput is a little less."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate Fortinet FortiADC's pricing one out of ten. It is fixed."
"The solution is less expensive than F5 or Imperva and is the most reasonably priced option available."
"The solution could be more cost-effective."
"They offer a perpetual license."
"I believe the price is good. It's fair. There are no extra costs."
"Our basic license excludes features such as antivirus and IDS. Due to license limitations, some functionalities are not configured."
"The solution's pricing is an issue and should be improved."
"Compared to F5, FortiADC pricing is better."
"Loadbalancer.org is based on open-source products, but it requires money for support and other activities."
"The solution requires an annual support license of $2,780 for four systems or $695 a year per unit for support not including the units."
"For now, it's stable."
"It filled a requirement for our project, and it did so at lesser cost than their competitors.​"
"It is inexpensive, and even their “unlimited” version, the VA MAX is still far cheaper than competitors."
"We've got an unlimited license, which doesn't costs that much compared to other vendors, and we don't have to buy it again."
"It's worth the cost. It's not cheap, but it's a good solution. If you're looking for a good solution, this is a good solution. Is it cheap? No. Is it worth the money? Yes, I think it is."
"These guys make their pricing scheme really easy.​"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
9%
Educational Organization
6%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
8%
University
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
For ADC, any ADC can do a good job. But in case if you want to add WAF functionality to the same ADC hardware you have to look for other ADC's like F5, Imperva, Radware, Fortinet, etc.
Do you recommend Fortinet FortiADC?
I recommend Fortinet FortiADC. My experience with Fortinet has been very positive. Our company has been using it for around five years. We mainly use FortiADC for the load balancing of application ...
What do you like most about Fortinet FortiADC?
The user interface is very easy and integrates with Sandbox easily.
Do you recommend Loadbalancer.org?
Since Loadbalancer.org is an open-source solution, I would recommend this solution for smaller businesses that don’t have major scaling requirements and don’t have the budget for a commercial solut...
What do you like most about Loadbalancer.org?
Existing customers are trying to migrate from the physical F5 load balancer to the AVI load balancer because it is scalable and easily managed.
 

Also Known As

FortiADC Application Delivery Controller, FortiADC
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Black Gold Regional Schools, Amadeus Hospitality, Jefferson County, Chunghwa Telecom, City of Boroondara, Dimension Data
Vodafone, NASA, Mercedes, NBC, Siemens, AT&T, Barclays, Zurich, Penn State University, Fiserv, Canon, Toyota, University of Cambridge, US Army, US Navy, Ocean Spray, ASOS, Pfizer, BBC, Bacardi, Monsoon, River Island, U.S Air Force, King's College London, NHS, Ricoh, Philips, Santander, TATA Communications, Ericcson, Ross Video, Evertz, TalkTalk TV, Giacom, Rapid Host.
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet FortiADC vs. Loadbalancer.org and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.