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

Fortinet FortiADC vs Radware LinkProof comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Fortinet FortiADC
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Radware LinkProof
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
14th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of Fortinet FortiADC is 9.6%, up from 7.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Radware LinkProof is 0.6%, down from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

Sameer Ghewade - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and scalable solution that is easy to operate and has single-handed control
Fortinet's fixed application version has very good policies. Some features have been reduced in the new version of Fortinet FortiADC. Whenever Fortinet updates its application version, it should provide the same features. For example, I was using MAC-based control for end users. Six months back, I updated the version of Fortinet OS. The MAC-based control on the new version was CLI-based, which is difficult to manage. I wanted the MAC-based control to be GUI-based. Fortinet FortiADC should include an advanced-level SD-WAN.
Saurabh-Pal - PeerSpot reviewer
Supports link load balance and has good stability
One person can do the configuration for Radware LinkProof, but more people will be needed to complete the configuration on time if you have multiple devices. Some people have a virtual license, while others have a license that needs to be upgraded. Depending upon the location, one or more technical persons are required for the solution's maintenance. Many people use Radware LinkProof, and it is available for small, medium, and enterprise businesses. I would not recommend Radware LinkProof to anyone because it only supports load balance, not DoS and WAF. If you have larger offices in different locations, you can use Radware LinkProof inside your offices. However, if you introduce it in a space open to the internet, you will have to use a separate device for DDoS and WAF. Overall, I rate Radware LinkProof an eight out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Fortinet FortiADC is a good product because each and every piece of content is monitored by it."
"Content caching and content compression are good features."
"Key features include SSL Offloading, VM availability, and L7 load balancing."
"We can do patches offline without causing customers outages. The web application firewall features, especially those related to the OWASP Top Ten, provide automated protections. This allows more flexibility in patching the backend applications. Additionally, it offers visibility into the requests being made to the applications, and you can't protect what you can't see."
"I like the solution's load balance with DNS intelligence."
"I am impressed with the product's load-balancing feature."
"The solution provides high-level services such as availability, redundancy, and load balancing between servers."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof is that it supports link load balance."
"The performance and stability are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof for traffic distribution is its DNS management capability."
"Provides good performance and scalability."
 

Cons

"Fortinet has some drawbacks, and it can be a bit challenging to scale."
"The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced."
"FortiADC is complex to configure so the interface should be improved."
"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 solution should improve finding false positives and false negatives. There are a lot of false positives."
"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."
"One of the product's areas of improvement includes reducing the number of components requiring additional licenses, such as antivirus and IDS, which are already covered by our firewall."
"Radware LinkProof's marketing efforts need improvement to raise awareness about its capabilities and compete effectively in the market."
"The solution lacks HA configuration."
"Radware LinkProof’s customer support could be improved."
"There are certain features I would like to see in the next release."
"Could have more customizations on the dashboard."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is competitive"
"I believe the price is good. It's fair. There are no extra costs."
"I rate Fortinet FortiADC's pricing one out of ten. It is fixed."
"The solution could be more cost-effective."
"The product has affordable pricing."
"Compared to F5, FortiADC pricing is better."
"They offer a perpetual license."
"Our basic license excludes features such as antivirus and IDS. Due to license limitations, some functionalities are not configured."
"Radware LinkProof is neither cheap nor expensive."
"Price-wise, the solution is a reasonable one."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
9%
Educational Organization
5%
Computer Software Company
24%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
8%
Retailer
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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.
What do you like most about Radware LinkProof?
The most valuable feature of Radware LinkProof for traffic distribution is its DNS management capability.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Radware LinkProof?
I would say Radware LinkProof falls into the mid-range pricing category. It is not cheap, but it is also not overly expensive.
What is your primary use case for Radware LinkProof?
I use Radware LinkProof to optimize our network by balancing multiple WAN links. It ensures uninterrupted access to applications by automatically redirecting traffic from failed or congested links.
 

Also Known As

FortiADC Application Delivery Controller, FortiADC
LinkProof
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Black Gold Regional Schools, Amadeus Hospitality, Jefferson County, Chunghwa Telecom, City of Boroondara, Dimension Data
Papa John's, OSRAM, ADP, NYLS
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortinet FortiADC vs. Radware LinkProof and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.