No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

AWS Shield vs Kemp LoadMaster comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

AWS Shield
Ranking in Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Kemp LoadMaster
Ranking in Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection
18th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (11th), Web Application Firewall (WAF) (28th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection category, the mindshare of AWS Shield is 3.0%, down from 5.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kemp LoadMaster is 1.2%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
AWS Shield3.0%
Kemp LoadMaster1.2%
Other95.8%
Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection
 

Featured Reviews

Pranav Telang - PeerSpot reviewer
DGM at Airtel Digital
Has enabled multi-layered threat mitigation but still lacks deeper visibility for advanced application attacks
AWS Shield has limited coverage as it only protects against common and high-volume network and transport layer attacks, such as SYN floods. It does not provide inherent protection against more sophisticated layer 7 attacks such as HTTP floods. In such cases, integration with WAF is necessary, which results in additional costs for customers. To protect layer 7, layer 4, and layer 3, customers must implement both solutions. The service also has difficulties with static detection thresholds, which may not be sensitive enough to detect smaller application-specific attacks. While AWS Shield is a key security service, AWS should enhance their expert support with 24/7 response for complex attacks, which is currently limited.
IshtiaqKhalil - PeerSpot reviewer
Information Security Engineer at BOK
Displays flexible, user-friendly interface with minor licensing challenges
The product could be improved with a more intuitive interface for complex configurations and more advanced analytics. Additionally, enhanced security features, like a more robust Web Application Firewall, and stronger APIs for better automation would be beneficial. Overall, the main areas for improvement are in strengthening the advanced features to better meet the demands of large-scale enterprise environments. key features for the next release should focus on three areas. First, an enhanced, next-generation security suite with a more powerful Web Application Firewall (WAF) and integrated bot protection. Second, more advanced and customizable analytics dashboards to provide deeper insights into application performance. Finally, greater support for modern, cloud-native environments, including better APIs for automation and seamless hybrid-cloud traffic management

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution's ease of use is the most valuable feature."
"It is quite scalable, and we have not faced any issues with its scalability."
"I am impressed with the product's multiple features like security."
"AWS Shield is aligned with the web application firewall (WAF), and they work seamlessly together, primarily working with Elastic Load Balancer, CloudFront, and Route 53 for CDN and DNS services protection."
"The product is easy to use."
"The product has a good mechanism to analyze trends and trigger events."
"It is integrated with AWS. So, it gives you a good first step."
"The automatic detection and mitigation of DDoS attacks in the product operates in real-time and provides satisfactory results."
"It has been functional. We don't have any outages."
"The Kemp LoadMaster is easy to set up, well documented, and very easy to maintain."
"Kemp LoadMaster is more efficient than the HA Proxy that we used a long time ago; it is an easy-to-use, user-friendly interface, and you can set up a new VIP in a couple of minutes."
"It has greatly fortified the performance and uptime of our front-door email ingress, simplified and segmented mail routing, and reduced admin overhead for mail issue resolution and troubleshooting."
"The most valuable features for us are the Load Balancing and Web Application Firewall, as we have a lot of web applications."
"With Kemp, I have been able to implement a global DNS load balancer between two sites for internal and external users with our existing Exchange DAG setup, making DR and BCP much easier to manage and giving me load balancing, SSL offloading, and Edge Security Packages all in one service that is much easier to manage from a day to day and single pane of glass perspective."
"Overall, the product has covered what we needed and even offered some additional features."
"Failover is seamless and our services are rock solid."
 

Cons

"We end up having to pay extra for features that AWS adds that we don't need."
"The product needs to improve its logs and reports to make it read better."
"The management of it is a bit hard. If you don't engineer it on the front side, it is hard to go back in and change it."
"AWS Shield has limited coverage as it only protects against common and high-volume network and transport layer attacks, such as SYN floods."
"The product should give users more flexibility to customize their security policies according to their requirements."
"The product is expensive."
"There is an area for improvement regarding health checks. AWS Shield does not come with its own health check functionality."
"Perhaps the time required to detect anomalies can be reduced. Presently, it takes some time to determine whether a situation is normal or abnormal."
"The GUI is rather technical and complex, so it could be improved by making it simpler and more user-friendly."
"We have experienced at least one problem with stability, although it was fixed with an upgrade."
"The only thing that I miss is that the TMG server was giving me live information about who is connected and what is the request about."
"To make it a perfect ten out of ten it would need better connection logging. If there is an active connection, that there is better logging. It should also have better management monitoring tools."
"In my opinion, the layer seven loads balancing that we're mainly using for web servers, doesn't seem to pick up when there are issues at the application level."
"SNMP and/or RESTCONF management, in order to collect many counters for plotting in a central application, needs to be improved."
"There are some challenges with updates on certain models that don't have a few features."
"There are many features that are missing or poorly implemented and things that you simply cannot do."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost depends on traffic each month, so on average, it costs us between US$200 and US$300 per month."
"The tool's pricing is good."
"It depends on your subscription level and the volume that you're spending with AWS. So, it is very relative to the consumption alignment in your subscription level. It is a well-constructed, scalable pricing option, but it is relative to how much you're spending on AWS. Because the more you spend, typically, the more you get off on services like this. I find it to be comparable to other solutions."
"The tool is cheap."
"We pay $3000 per month for the solution."
"It has a great price for the solution they offer."
"The price is great and the value is definitely there."
"At $2,500 USD, this is absolutely a fantastic buy for the money!"
"This is a cost-efficient product."
"Licensing is yearly and I am going to guess that it is CAN $2000.00."
"They have multiple tiers of licensing and you can upgrade it easily."
"Nowadays, going with the virtual appliance is the easiest way and the cost is reasonable."
"From a cost perspective, Kemp is very competitive and is not hard to justify by any means."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) Protection solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
16%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Construction Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business24
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise16
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS Shield?
The pricing structure for AWS Shield is fair, yet it depends on the specific protections chosen. Enabling Shield Advanced on multiple services such as CloudFront, network load balancer, or Route 53...
What needs improvement with AWS Shield?
Services always benefit from improvements, including AWS Shield. With respect to the Web Application Firewall, current rule-based setups may not be adequately defined or classified. Enhancement of ...
What is your primary use case for AWS Shield?
What do you use it for? How do you use it?
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Kemp LoadMaster?
My primary advice is to carefully analyze your total cost of ownership (TCO) rather than just the initial purchase price. Kemp LoadMaster is highly competitive on price and often provides a much be...
What needs improvement with Kemp LoadMaster?
The product could be improved with a more intuitive interface for complex configurations and more advanced analytics. Additionally, enhanced security features, like a more robust Web Application Fi...
What is your primary use case for Kemp LoadMaster?
Our primary use case was traffic load balancing and distribution. The solution was essential for managing all inbound client traffic, including HTTPS and DNS requests, by routing it through our fir...
 

Also Known As

No data available
LoadMaster Load Balancer
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

netflix, dow jones, mapbox, pearson, rovio, youview, moviestar planet, asurion, payplug, hour of code
Kent County Council, KEMP, SMA Solar Technology AG, RT€ Player , Victrix (Quebec, Canada), Texas A&M, Macmillan Cancer Support, Cisco, Austin Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Shield vs. Kemp LoadMaster and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.