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

Kemp LoadMaster 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

Kemp LoadMaster
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
8th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
49
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 February 2025, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of Kemp LoadMaster is 7.5%, up from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Loadbalancer.org is 3.3%, up from 3.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Q&A Highlights

reviewer1407621 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 15, 2021
 

Featured Reviews

PeterForster - PeerSpot reviewer
A highly stable and scalable load-balancing software that offers great technical support
My company is really happy with Kemp LoadMaster as a product. My company is also happy with the support we receive from Kemp LoadMaster. I want Kemp LoadMaster to provide users with better reporting capabilities in relation to TCP packets. In general, the connections that are present in the system require improvement. Feature-wise, Kemp LoadMaster has everything that our company's customers require. Kemp LoadMaster also has features that have supported our company's past projects.
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

"The security features, load balancing, built-in templates, and the easy to implement virtual IPs are great."
"The old process of manually having to redirect Outlook Web Access traffic and Email traffic to a second server is a thing of the past."
"There is a simplicity to the setup and configuration."
"The most valuable feature is the load balancing and allowing for high availability of our web services."
"The pricing of the solution is valuable."
"The user interface is very easy to work with."
"The Global WAF has saved us more than one time from unwanted traffic."
"It helps with efficiency and reactivity, in case of assistance needs."
"It's pretty much a Swiss Army knife for managing all the load balancing techniques."
"The SSL Layer 7 load balancing is valuable."
"The features I find valuable in this solution are the ease of managing the logs on the WAFs, the ease to identify break-in attempts into the network, the front-end firewall, and a more specific firewall."
"We have about 30,000 connections going through at any one time and it's fine, it doesn't seem to sweat. It doesn't get overloaded."
"Loadbalancer.org is less complex than Citrix."
"I found scalability in Loadbalancer.org valuable."
"The most valuable features of Loadbalancer.org are related to its load balancing capabilities."
"The load balancers have an easy installation and a relatively simple, easy user interface to use."
 

Cons

"We experienced a brief period of instability."
"I would like to see more automation and control of overactive and inactive resources. If I could schedule these around our updates then it would be all automated. I would like to set up an automated script to coincide with the scripts I use to update resources and servers."
"There are some challenges with updates on certain models that don't have a few features."
"The product could be improved by making the SSL Offloading easier."
"In the web interface, there are a lot of settings in the different menus and it would be helpful if there were an interactive help system or tooltips to help the administrators find and configure the right settings."
"If you want logging for SMTP traffic, you have to enable ESP, which requires you to define allowed IP addresses. That’s irritating, to say the least."
"It would be helpful if there were a way to incorporate tooltips on the fields so that we don't have to dig through documentation."
"The ability to see live traffic is not great and can be improved."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"Loadbalancer.org's complexity could be reduced."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"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."
"If I have to say something, I suppose they could add an automated configuration backup to an FTP location (or something similar) so you don’t have to manually do it. I don’t see this as a problem, of course, as the configuration rarely changes and we only need one backup, but maybe for other users that feature would be handy."
"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."
"Originally we had some stability issues with it, so they replaced it with a new box and it's fine."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The costs for the Kemp Load Balancer solution are okay because, for a good product, you have to spend money."
"This is a cost-efficient product."
"This product has good value and features for the money."
"Any decent product will cost money and if you want great support and a great product, then you will want to spend the money on it."
"Currently, no cost is involved with a virtual load balancer. They have used open source. We did not pay for software. We paid for the expertise. We are only paying the consulting charges, which are very reasonable, that is, around a thousand dollars."
"It has a great price for the solution they offer."
"Download Kemp's VLM trial and take it for a test drive; you will be impressed."
"​I have control on the licensing and all the prices since I work for a partner.​"
"They're not the cheapest, not the most expensive, but I think value-wise, they're 100%."
"It was easy to upgrade the license for unlimited clusters and servers. Pricing is fair."
"I love that they do not price on some arbitrary throughput rating where you are guessing at what the load balancer is going to handle."
"I’m not entirely sure about the rating since I'm not very technical. I haven't thoroughly compared the ratings. So, if you're asking for my impression so far, I would rate it around five out of 10."
"The costs associated with Loadbalancer.org depends on the technology. For some, we need to pay, but others are open, so they're free."
"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."
"It is inexpensive, and even their “unlimited” version, the VA MAX is still far cheaper than competitors."
"Loadbalancer.org is based on open-source products, but it requires money for support and other activities."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Answers from the Community

reviewer1407621 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 15, 2021
Sep 15, 2021
Kemp LoadMaster is a vendor designed and supported load balancing platform focused on core load balancing technologies. Kemp supports server load balancing (SLB) and global server load balancing (GSLB). LoadMaster supports edge authentication including two-factor authentication, single sign on (SSO), Kerberos, and LDAP among other models. Kemp LoadMaster also has the ability to provide fully...
2 out of 5 answers
SP
Aug 25, 2020
1. Kemp Load Master only support SaaS whereas Loadbalancer.org support Windows, Mac & SaaS. 2. Both having Authentication, Automatic Configuration, Content Routing, Content Caching,Data Compression, Health Monitoring, Redundancy Checking etc facility.
FY
Sep 16, 2020
Kemp LoadMaster is a vendor designed and supported load balancing platform focused on core load balancing technologies.  Kemp supports server load balancing (SLB) and global server load balancing (GSLB).  LoadMaster supports edge authentication including two-factor authentication, single sign on (SSO), Kerberos, and LDAP among other models.  Kemp LoadMaster also has the ability to provide fully functional web application firewall (WAF) services. LoadMaster is a software-based solution available as a VM for all major hypervisors, cloud marketplace (AWS, Azure, etc.) and hardware.  Kemp simplifies the load balancing technology through a simple to use GUI and over 80 templates for the most commonly used applications. Kemp is a global organization with 100,000+ deployments and the top rated load balancer on Gartner's Peer Insights with over 150 recent ratings: www.gartner.com/reviews/market/application-delivery-controllers LoadBalancer.org uses software based on opensource HAProxy and opensource Pound.  LoadBalancer.org also utilizes other opensource projects such as STunnel and Ldirectord.  You will get the features within the free HAProxy code (and others) with a LoadBalancer.org GUI.  This information is documented in their current Administration Manual:  http://pdfs.loadbalancer.org/loadbalanceradministrationv8.pdf This means that the functionality is dependent on the opensource community for updates and there will be a lag for these features to be rolled into LoadBalancer.org's product. From a performance perspective, both vendors probably have solutions to meet your needs.  I also believe that both solutions can support the applications that you plan to load balance.  The more important questions to ask yourself are 1) how easy it will be for you to configure and deploy the load balancing technology and 2) how painful will it be for you to manage and support the technology operationally. First, I believe that you will find both solutions relatively easy to deploy since both vendors focus on core load balancing functionality (SLB and GSLB).  Having said that, Kemp offers pre-built application templates for many commonly used applications to make the configuration that much easier: https://kemptechnologies.com/docs/.  Kemp focuses on making the work easy for the customer. Second, for operational support, I cannot speak for LoadBalancer.org's support organization, but Kemp's is stellar with a 99% customer satisfaction feedback rating.  As mentioned above, one concern for vendors that rely heavily on opensource code is the delay from an opensource project update to the time those changes get incorporated into a vendor's officially released and supported product.  We (the IT industry) have seen problems with this model on a regular basis throughout time.  A good example is the delay for all vendors as OpenSSL code was updated from 1.0.1 to 1.1 to 1.1.1 and all of the discovered security vulnerabilities with prior versions. Major caveat:  I work for Kemp.  Having said that, I have worked with load balancing technology for over 20 years (starting with Cisco Local Director), and have worked with, and for, multiple load balancing vendors.  My goal is to be factual.  I have sourced my data where possible and if I have not, I recommend that you fact check my information.  Ultimately, I believe with the correct data, you will make the right decision.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
65%
Computer Software Company
7%
Government
3%
University
3%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
9%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Kemp LoadMaster?
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten...I rate the technical support a ten out of ten...The initial setup of Kemp LoadMaster is very simple.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kemp LoadMaster?
LoadMaster is cheaper than some other solutions. It has a perpetual license, so it's a one-time cost.
What needs improvement with Kemp LoadMaster?
There are some challenges with updates on certain models that don't have a few features. The support team often takes a lot of time to provide resolutions for issues. Also, I could see more capabil...
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

LoadMaster Load Balancer
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Kent County Council, KEMP, SMA Solar Technology AG, RT€ Player , Victrix (Quebec, Canada), Texas A&M, Macmillan Cancer Support, Cisco, Austin Bank
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 Kemp LoadMaster vs. Loadbalancer.org and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.