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 April 2025, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of Kemp LoadMaster is 7.6%, up from 7.3% 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)
 

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 most valuable feature that I found is the load balancing feature, it is the core function of the product."
"The user interface is very easy to work with."
"I like the way this solution handles multiple SSLs in different domains while still load balancing."
"The most beneficial function of using the ADC is to ensure this resiliency."
"The security features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"​Simple to install with good documentation."
"The feature that allows us to easily disconnect a server when we need and bring back online is the most valuable. It's a click of a button. This allows us to keep all systems up. We can then run updates, perform reboots whatever we need to one of the servers without taking production down."
"When the templates are used, there is not much left to configure and they just work!"
"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."
"For now, it's stable."
"The SSL Layer 7 load balancing is valuable."
"We now get notifications when pool members go down, and we eliminate our downtime by not sending traffic to downed pool members.​"
"The connection that this solution helps our servers maintain has been most useful."
"Most important for us that it makes sure that the load is distributed and that we always have access to the end servers."
"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."
 

Cons

"There is room for improvement in the stability of the solution."
"So far, the only hitch we have run into is that would have been nice to have an easier method to add allow/whitelist entries into the Access Control lists for virtual services."
"Third, the password history restriction needs improvement. For example, the password policy will restrict the user to always use a unique password combination. The password should not be reused for a minimum of three generations of passwords."
"We experienced a brief period of instability."
"SNMP and/or RESTCONF management, in order to collect many counters, for plotting in a central application need to be improved."
"Some documentation is out of date versus the new version, and things have been moved​."
"We have experienced at least one problem with stability, although it was fixed with an upgrade."
"In the next release, they can introduce 360 views in the same dashboard to make it easier for users to view. The graphical information should be displayed on the dashboard."
"​The automatic refresh of the System Overview webpage: It sometimes has an extra webpage reload (after a change) before you see it is executed. This can be confusing."
"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."
"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."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"Compared to the physical products, the solution's throughput is a little less."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in Loadbalancer.org in certain areas."
"Possibly a more graphical overview page (with colors) to give a two second overview to see if everything is working fine."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They have multiple tiers of licensing and you can upgrade it easily."
"The price is lower than other options."
"Less expensive than Citrix."
"The costs for the Kemp Load Balancer solution are okay because, for a good product, you have to spend money."
"The price is great and the value is definitely there."
"Nowadays, going with the virtual appliance is the easiest way and the cost is reasonable."
"The license varies according to the number of megabits."
"It has a very attractive ratio of price/performance."
"I think it’s very affordable."
"For now, it's stable."
"It is inexpensive, and even their “unlimited” version, the VA MAX is still far cheaper than competitors."
"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."
"It was easy to upgrade the license for unlimited clusters and servers. Pricing is fair."
"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’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."
"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.
845,406 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
63%
Computer Software Company
7%
University
3%
Government
3%
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

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: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.