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 March 2025, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of Fortinet FortiADC is 9.8%, up from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Loadbalancer.org is 3.4%, up from 3.1% 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

"From a technical perspective, it is the most scalable device from Fortinet."
"The solution enhances performance by efficiently balancing the load across multiple backend servers."
"TSL and SSL offloading are both very good features."
"This ensures that clients can connect to their applications without interruption."
"Ease of use in deploying and having it up and running requires minimal knowledge."
"Although FortiADC has multiple features that I like, the global DNS is the most helpful. It is primarily useful for customers with huge environments and at least two data centers. FortiADC can act as your DNS server. It can check which data center has the lowest latency, and route traffic to that one. It's an intelligent DNS."
"I like the solution's load balance with DNS intelligence."
"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."
"It helps us to route the traffic to the available servers. If we didn't have Loadbalancer we would fail to set the end-user and it would cause a failure in the cluster."
"It's pretty much a Swiss Army knife for managing all the load balancing techniques."
"The most valuable features of Loadbalancer.org are related to its load balancing capabilities."
"The support we have received from Loadbalancer.org has been good."
"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."
"Loadbalancer.org is less complex than Citrix."
"The connection that this solution helps our servers maintain has been most useful."
"The user interface precludes need to be well versed with Linux IPVS command line. This make it easy for junior team members to participate in managing load balancing needs."
 

Cons

"The user interface could be more friendly and CLI could be more like that of Fortigate."
"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."
"The initial setup could be simplified."
"The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced."
"Because it is so generic, the documentation requires special attention. A person who has not worked on Fortinet FortiADC or a similar product will struggle to understand what the document is trying to say. The documentation could be more specific, and more detailed."
"The product's stability for VMs could be better."
"I had a terrible experience with Fortinet support. I only used support once when I bought the solution. I got no response for two days. However, I believe that it's no longer the case. Fortinet solutions have problems when they're launched. For example, we had issues with Fortinet's authenticator when it came out. We also had trouble with FortiNAC in the beginning."
"FortiADC is complex to configure so the interface should be improved."
"There is room for improvement in Loadbalancer.org in certain areas."
"​I would like a notification when a new version of the software is available. They told me to sign up for their newsletter, but I have not received any notification for a newer software version.​"
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"They're mostly designed to balance a particular type of traffic. I wanted to load balance DNS, and they just don't do it the way that we wanted to. So they're not used as DNS load balancers."
"You can run into an issue when one engineer passes the case over to another engineer after their shift and they don't know what the first engineer worked on up to that point."
"An area for improvement in Loadbalancer.org is that sometimes it works fine, but sometimes, it has issues. The setup for Loadbalancer.org is also complex, so that's another area for improvement."
"It doesn't have the bonding capability feature."
"I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to F5, FortiADC pricing is better."
"The solution's pricing is an issue and should be improved."
"The product has average pricing. I rate its pricing a five out of ten."
"Our basic license excludes features such as antivirus and IDS. Due to license limitations, some functionalities are not configured."
"The solution could be more cost-effective."
"I believe the price is good. It's fair. There are no extra costs."
"They offer a perpetual license."
"The price is competitive"
"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."
"These guys make their pricing scheme really easy.​"
"Loadbalancer.org is based on open-source products, but it requires money for support and other activities."
"It filled a requirement for our project, and it did so at lesser cost than their competitors.​"
"It was easy to upgrade the license for unlimited clusters and servers. Pricing is fair."
"Licensing fees are paid annually."
"The costs associated with Loadbalancer.org depends on the technology. For some, we need to pay, but others are open, so they're free."
"I think it’s very affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
9%
University
7%
 

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: March 2025.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.