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

Amazon Elastic Load Balancing vs Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall [EOL] comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 2, 2026

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

Amazon Elastic Load Balancing
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ivanti Virtual Web Applicat...
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
17th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (44th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of Amazon Elastic Load Balancing is 2.6%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall [EOL] is 2.5%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Amazon Elastic Load Balancing2.6%
Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall2.5%
Other94.9%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

Mohd Farhan - PeerSpot reviewer
AWS Cloud Solution Developer | DevOps | SpringBoot | Android/iOS at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Manage complex traffic routing with ease and ensure system availability
The ELB would benefit from allowing deployment in a single availability zone for test servers to avoid unnecessary costs. Additionally, the ability to directly block specific IP addresses without additional service integration would be beneficial. Furthermore, sometimes ALB has a delay in recognizing the need to scale the system based on CloudWatch metrics, which could use improvement.
MD
Consultant at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
Good feature set and is simple to deploy
In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered. We've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else. We sort of stopped deploying them because of that. There are additional costs to the standard licensing. There are bandwidth prices. The feature set is quite good. We've been told to stop using them because of the price. If they can do something to address that I believe it would be better. On the latest version they've got a community edition, which is quite a good bandwidth, but in essence, it's to address the entry-level price. When you get to 10 gig bandwidth, it's way too expensive.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I appreciate the checks that Elastic Load Balancer performs with the instances to ensure they are running properly."
"The solution is known for its scalability and stability."
"It has very good features. It is very configurable. Security with TLS, et cetera is also very easy."
"Very easy to implement. Very well integrated into Amazon's services."
"Amazon Elastic Load Balancing has improved our application availability by routing client requests only to healthy EC2 instances."
"Customer support is good."
"The feature that I like the most is the scalability. The solutions I build often have many pieces, which are very complicated. If a client comes to me with a design, my developer has made this as a template or a cloud formation script. It's a design on paper, and I want it executed a certain way. I can do that quickly and repeatedly with AWS. That is a considerable advantage because I can take that template and do it five times in different zones. That is an excellent feature based on a template, et cetera."
"I recommend the AWS network load balancer for high-traffic web applications due to its speed and control over configuration settings, which allows handling low-level details efficiently."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that it is simple to deploy. The deployment took us ten minutes."
 

Cons

"One issue that we faced with ALB was that leaf-level certificate validation was not happening. It is not that user-friendly in that aspect."
"The latency compared to the network load balancer could be improved."
"Improvements could involve making Amazon Elastic Load Balancing a global service, as currently, it is region-specific."
"Google Cloud Platform (GCP) is superior for load balancing in terms of both cost and functionality."
"It would be good if we had a product that integrates well with third-party vendors. Some of our customers want a multi-cloud solution. They don't want to be tied up to or be in just one cloud."
"The reporting could be simplified so that the client sees a report of what they cached at the end of the month and the number of hits. It should have metrics above and beyond their Google analytics, etc. You can't do that with the solutions from AWS. You have to build sophisticated cloud trails, reports, dashboards, etc. The setup is significant, and it's hard to manage. You'll need to hire someone or pay a consultant on a regular basis to manage it, and it's not for the faint of heart."
"The product's stability is an area with a slight shortcoming, which can be improved."
"AWS is doing well with Amazon Elastic Load Balancing, however, they could improve provisioning speed."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered. We've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is a yearly license."
"The cost for using the application load balancer is approximately $18 to $21 per month."
"The product is not cheap."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of connections one uses. It is a free tool for a certain amount of connections, which runs into thousands, and after that, there is a certain amount to be paid to Amazon."
"The solution's pricing is $30 per month."
"The solution is expensive."
"I have no issues with the tool's pricing."
"The solution's pricing is low and I rate it a nine out of ten."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Construction Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
12%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise7
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Amazon Elastic Load Balancing?
Cost is definitely an area of improvement for Amazon. Availability can be improved through the addition of more regions. For example, in India, we have just two regions at the moment, which impacts...
What is your primary use case for Amazon Elastic Load Balancing?
We use several Amazon solutions including Lambda, S3, and EKS. Within EKS, there are various microservices, and DynamoDB is one of them in terms of databases. We also use various applications such ...
What advice do you have for others considering Amazon Elastic Load Balancing?
I would prefer to remain totally anonymous. I am a partner with Amazon. I rate this solution as 8 out of 10.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Pulse vWAF, Pulse Virtual Traffic Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
Gilt Groupe
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, HAProxy, NetScaler and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: October 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.