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

CloudFloorDNS Enterprise DNS vs LoadBalancer Enterprise 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

CloudFloorDNS Enterprise DNS
Average Rating
9.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Managed DNS (16th)
LoadBalancer Enterprise
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

CloudFloorDNS Enterprise DNS and LoadBalancer Enterprise aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. CloudFloorDNS Enterprise DNS is designed for Managed DNS and holds a mindshare of 1.2%, up 0.2% compared to last year.
LoadBalancer Enterprise, on the other hand, focuses on Application Delivery Controllers (ADC), holds 5.6% mindshare, up 4.3% since last year.
Managed DNS Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
CloudFloorDNS Enterprise DNS1.2%
Cloudflare23.5%
Quad921.9%
Other53.400000000000006%
Managed DNS
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
LoadBalancer Enterprise5.6%
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)11.6%
NetScaler11.6%
Other71.2%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

Jonathan Sprague - PeerSpot reviewer
Global Sr. Infrastructure Engineer - Technical Lead at Octapharma
Support and communication have been great during setup and implementation
Allocating SRV based on geographical location using GeoDNS. This was primarily for a global VOIP deployment. We also use GeoDNS with A records to distribute different versions of websites according to the country which provides us some regulatory value and more direct marketing. It also allows us…
SM
Senior L3 Cloud Platform Network & Security Engineer at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
High availability and strong security have supported our apps but advanced traffic control still improves
LoadBalancer Enterprise can be improved because the layer seven programmability is not as powerful as it could be. We cannot write code and programming on it. Additionally, access management and identity options are not available here like they are in F5 VPN. The WAF depth and analytics, such as in-depth logs and the WAF learning option that we have in other load balancers, are much easier to configure and to harden the policies and polish them. That option is not here. Fine-tuning is a bit difficult compared to other solutions. The automation and API maturity does not appear to be at the level of other load balancers. The main limitation is that there is nothing here with regards to F5 APM. There is no iRules option or policy option to manipulate the traffic according to requirements, which is a bit difficult. If an organization is basic and does not want very advanced features, then it is acceptable. However, if advanced features such as iRules are required, and complete detailed WAF monitoring is desired along with policies that can be learned and then implemented afterwards as you have in F5, then LoadBalancer Enterprise lacks these capabilities.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We have improved our flexibility to deploy web-based or DNS based solutions globally and deliver services more reliably."
"Tough to provide numbers, but avoiding downtime and calls from my employees when the VPN goes down was priceless."
"Great performance, easy configuration."
"Support was outstanding when first setting up in trial mode and also after we had gone live with the product."
"Existing customers are trying to migrate from the physical F5 load balancer to the AVI load balancer because it is scalable and easily managed."
"Loadbalancer.org has been stable for the most part."
"The technical support at Loadbalancer.org is possibly one of the best that I have had to deal with and it is 24/7, too."
"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."
"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."
"Now, we achieve about 99% availability across all servers thanks to the health check feature in the load balancer."
"We now get notifications when pool members go down, and we eliminate our downtime by not sending traffic to downed pool members.​"
"I found scalability in Loadbalancer.org valuable."
 

Cons

"Compared to the other platforms, the interface is not as smooth, but the options and support help make that a non-issue."
"The email for each line change is excessive, perhaps if the change emails consolidated all changes per domain in a given hour."
"My only recommendation might be a better, more modern interface."
"Just to be able to import records with our current DNS product which didn't seem to work with importing domains using AXFR zone transfer records."
"Compared to the physical products, the solution's throughput is a little less."
"Currently, it is not scalable. We have already reached our limit."
"LoadBalancer Enterprise could work more on content caching by bypassing the back-end server more often and making the cache more accessible so that it gives better and more robust results."
"There is room for improvement in Loadbalancer.org in certain areas."
"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."
"Possibly a more graphical overview page (with colors) to give a two second overview to see if everything is working fine."
"I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly."
"The interface from Loadbalancer.org should be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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 love that they do not price on some arbitrary throughput rating where you are guessing at what the load balancer is going to handle."
"It was easy to upgrade the license for unlimited clusters and servers. Pricing is fair."
"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 filled a requirement for our project, and it did so at lesser cost than their competitors.​"
"For now, it's stable."
"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."
"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 Managed DNS solutions are best for your needs.
916,956 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Construction Company
15%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise20
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Loadbalancer.org?
The cost of LoadBalancer Enterprise is better and a bit cheaper compared to other products. The support level is also very good, and the maintenance cost is less than other products. The deployment...
What needs improvement with Loadbalancer.org?
LoadBalancer Enterprise can be improved because the layer seven programmability is not as powerful as it could be. We cannot write code and programming on it. Additionally, access management and id...
 

Also Known As

CloudFloorDNS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rhapsody, Napster, Everbridge, Voiply, ZVOX, Tivoli Audio, iModules, VOIP Innovations
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 Cloudflare, Amazon Web Services (AWS), BlueCat and others in Managed DNS. Updated: October 2026.
916,956 professionals have used our research since 2012.