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

Kemp LoadMaster vs LoadBalancer Enterprise comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 27, 2025

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)
9th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
LoadBalancer Enterprise
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
13th
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 August 2025, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of Kemp LoadMaster is 7.3%, up from 7.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of LoadBalancer Enterprise is 3.9%, up from 3.4% 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 DNS Load Balancer makes it so that I don't have to worry about site failures."
"From my personal experience, many firewalls provide Load Balancing functionalities, but Kemp Loadmaster has a lot of features and functionalities like what you can configure. So there are a lot of features but we use only five percent of it."
"LoadMaster is easy to deploy and understand."
"The most valuable feature so far has been the high-availability options that allowed us to add an additional Kemp LoadMaster VLM virtual appliance into our VMware vSphere environment, to provide failover for our existing LoadMaster."
"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 old process of manually having to redirect Outlook Web Access traffic and Email traffic to a second server is a thing of the past."
"I like the way this solution handles multiple SSLs in different domains while still load balancing."
"One of the most valuable features I like is the ability to block specific cipher suites like RC4, and older protocols like SSL 3.0."
"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."
"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 is less complex than Citrix."
"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."
"We now get notifications when pool members go down, and we eliminate our downtime by not sending traffic to downed pool members.​"
"For now, it's stable."
"The SSL Layer 7 load balancing is valuable."
"With basic network knowledge, our required system functionality can be configured and maintained.​"
 

Cons

"I think there should be more visual instructions on how to configure advanced features."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in the stability of the solution."
"The configuration of the basic services is pretty straight forward but for more complex solutions, there needs to be better documentation or knowledge base articles."
"Certificate installations could be simplified and modernized, and allowed to be monitored for expirations/issues."
"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."
"They need to improve the UI environment. Currently, it's hard to navigate and use product."
"Although Kemp is very user-friendly, it lacks a more custom configuration."
"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."
"Originally we had some stability issues with it, so they replaced it with a new box and it's fine."
"​I would like a notification when a new version of the software is available. They told me to sign up for their newsletter, but I have not received any notification for a newer software version.​"
"Loadbalancer.org's complexity could be reduced."
"We could enhance the security aspects of the load balancer."
"There is room for improvement in Loadbalancer.org in certain areas."
"It doesn't have the bonding capability feature."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It has a great price for the solution they offer."
"This product has good value and features for the money."
"Licensing is yearly and I am going to guess that it is CAN $2000.00."
"It is well-priced and licensing is very flexible."
"At $2,500 USD, this is absolutely a fantastic buy for the money!"
"​I have control on the licensing and all the prices since I work for a partner.​"
"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."
"Download Kemp's VLM trial and take it for a test drive; you will be impressed."
"Licensing fees are paid annually."
"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."
"We've got an unlimited license, which doesn't costs that much compared to other vendors, and we don't have to buy it again."
"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."
"For now, it's stable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 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
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
8%
University
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
11%
University
8%
Government
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 Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.