We performed a comparison between Citrix NetScaler and Fortinet FortiADC based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a complete solution for those looking for an all-in-one."
"NetScaler Gateway: Why? Availability/Security: We delivered more than 200 applications thru Xenapp. This feature give us the possibility to deliver the applications anywhere. Currently, 30% of access is made through our NetScaler Gateway (Internet connections)."
"The load balancing feature of this solution is very good."
"Its customer support service is good."
"The best feature of Citrix is its track record of stability in its features."
"Very stable."
"The load balancing is one of the most valuable features."
"I find all of it to be valuable, because of the flexibility that is built into this product."
"I like the solution's load balance with DNS intelligence."
"The user interface is very easy and integrates with Sandbox easily."
"Fortinet FortiADC is a good product because each and every piece of content is monitored by it."
"TSL and SSL offloading are both very good features."
"The GSLB, the DR side, is the best part. Because we had our main side in one city, we created another, and we had a complete MPLS over the internet. We used the GSLB and data loss for our business applications."
"The product has flexible and interesting licensing options."
"I am impressed with the product's load-balancing feature."
"The solution provides high-level services such as availability, redundancy, and load balancing between servers."
"Improvements are needed to address the issue of machines becoming unregistered, ensuring stability for end users. Troubleshooting with Citrix support can be challenging, so clearer diagnostics would be beneficial. As for global server load balancing, it works well on-premises, depending on user volume and service stability. Overall, it's satisfactory for us."
"Reducing the overhead required for AppFlow data collection, specifically for HDX Insight, would be a huge improvement."
"The licensing model and technical support of the solution could be improved."
"Its GUI should be improved. Its CLI is powerful, but GUI needs more features."
"Mastering it requires significant learning and training due to its complexity."
"The main areas for improvement would be around documentation and support. If a feature can be used in two or three ways, show that feature being used in all of those ways. Documentation seems to only cover the primary use case and leaves you to either run through trial and error or consult the user community. In terms of support, I have never actually had them solve any of my issues. I have always solved them myself and then provided the resolution to support."
"I would like to see support for scripting, like "iRule", which gives you the option to implement any configuration which is not available out of the box."
"They can improve the scalability and the multi-tenancy feature. We recently tried to configure an authentication, and we ran into some issues while using the web-based GUI. It was very slow when you log in with your credentials in the web-based GUI. Each time we clicked on the menu, it tried to do the authentication. It works properly in the console."
"It would be good if they built in a fully functional web application firewall."
"The solution's WAF needs an upgrade because it is not as good as FortiWeb, VMware, F5, or Imperva."
"I had a terrible experience with Fortinet support. I only used support once when I bought the solution. I got no response for two days. However, I believe that it's no longer the case. Fortinet solutions have problems when they're launched. For example, we had issues with Fortinet's authenticator when it came out. We also had trouble with FortiNAC in the beginning."
"Fortinet has some drawbacks, and it can be a bit challenging to scale."
"FortiADC is complex to configure so the interface should be improved."
"The user interface could be more friendly and CLI could be more like that of Fortigate."
"Because it is so generic, the documentation requires special attention. A person who has not worked on Fortinet FortiADC or a similar product will struggle to understand what the document is trying to say. The documentation could be more specific, and more detailed."
"The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced."
Citrix NetScaler is ranked 2nd in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 85 reviews while Fortinet FortiADC is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 19 reviews. Citrix NetScaler is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiADC is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Citrix NetScaler writes "Optimizing application delivery and ensuring robust network performance with its excellent stability and comprehensive load-balancing capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiADC writes "High-level load balancing and routing protocols but scalability is limited to 200 gigabits". Citrix NetScaler is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, HAProxy, Loadbalancer.org and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, whereas Fortinet FortiADC is most compared with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), Fortinet FortiWeb, Kemp LoadMaster, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and HAProxy. See our Citrix NetScaler vs. Fortinet FortiADC report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.