Kubernetes Ingress vs LoadBalancer

Kubernetes Ingress vs LoadBalancer? Which one is better?

When deploying applications in Kubernetes, one of the most essential challenges is how to expose your services to external users.

Whether you’re hosting a web API, a frontend application, or a multi-service microservices architecture, enabling secure and scalable access is key.

Kubernetes offers multiple ways to handle this, with two of the most widely used options being:

• Ingress: An API object that manages external access to services, typically HTTP/S, using a set of rules defined in an Ingress resource.

• LoadBalancer: A type of service that provisions an external load balancer (usually provided by a cloud provider) to route traffic directly to your pods.

Both approaches serve the purpose of exposing services, but they differ significantly in how they operate, the level of control they offer, and their use cases.

In this guide, we’ll break down the differences between Kubernetes Ingress and LoadBalancer, when to use each, how they work under the hood, and how they impact your cluster architecture.

By the end, you’ll have a clear understanding of which solution best fits your needs.

Want to Dive Deeper into Related Kubernetes Topics?

• Learn how to optimize Kubernetes resource limits to prevent waste and improve performance.

• Explore HPA in Kubernetes to dynamically scale your services based on demand.

• Check out our post on Load Balancer for Kubernetes for a comprehensive overview of different load balancing strategies.

Additional Resources

• Kubernetes Ingress Documentation

• NGINX Ingress Controller GitHub

  ---

  What is a Kubernetes LoadBalancer?

  A Kubernetes LoadBalancer is a type of service that exposes your application to the internet by provisioning an external load balancer through the underlying infrastructure provider, such as AWS, Google Cloud Platform (GCP), or Microsoft Azure.

  When you create a Service of type LoadBalancer, Kubernetes communicates with the cloud provider to create a new external load balancer and assigns it a public IP address.

  This load balancer then routes traffic directly to the backend pods via a NodePort or ClusterIP service.

  How It Works

  Here’s the basic workflow:

  1. You define a Kubernetes Service with type: LoadBalancer.

  2. Kubernetes asks the cloud provider to create a Layer 4 (TCP/UDP) load balancer.

  3. The provider allocates an external IP and associates it with the load balancer.

  4. The load balancer forwards requests to your service, which sends them to the appropriate pods.

  This is especially useful for services that need to be publicly accessible with minimal setup.

  Cloud Provider Support

  The LoadBalancer type is supported on most major cloud platforms:

  • AWS: Uses Elastic Load Balancer (ELB) (either Classic, Application, or Network Load Balancers depending on annotations).

  • Google Cloud Platform: Uses Google Cloud Load Balancer.

  • Azure: Uses Azure Load Balancer, with support for public and private load balancers.

  On bare-metal clusters, this functionality isn’t natively available — tools like MetalLB are required to replicate this behavior (see our MetalLB vs HAProxy post for more).

  Pros and Cons

  Pros	Cons
  Simple to set up	One LoadBalancer per service can be costly
  Direct external IP access	Limited to Layer 4 (TCP/UDP)
  Cloud-native and integrated	Not ideal for complex routing logic
  Great for exposing databases, APIs, or legacy apps	Requires cloud provider support

  Example YAML Configuration

  yaml

  apiVersion: v1
kind: Service
metadata:
name: my-app-service
spec:
selector:
app: my-app
type: LoadBalancer
ports:
- protocol: TCP
port: 80
targetPort: 8080


  Once applied, Kubernetes will provision an external IP and traffic to that IP will be routed to your application pods.

  Up next: “What is Kubernetes Ingress?” – where we’ll explore how Ingress adds smarter HTTP-level routing and better control over traffic flow.

  ---

  What is Kubernetes Ingress?

  Kubernetes Ingress is a powerful way to manage HTTP and HTTPS traffic to your services.

  Unlike a LoadBalancer, which operates at Layer 4 (TCP/UDP), an Ingress acts at Layer 7 (HTTP/HTTPS) and provides fine-grained routing rules such as host-based or path-based routing.

  It serves as an intelligent reverse proxy for your Kubernetes services.

  How It Works

  Ingress relies on a controller—a special pod running inside your cluster that reads Ingress resources and configures an underlying reverse proxy (such as NGINX, Traefik, or HAProxy) to route traffic.

  Popular Ingress controllers include:

  • NGINX Ingress Controller

  • Traefik

  • HAProxy Ingress

  Unlike the LoadBalancer service type that creates one external IP per service, an Ingress can consolidate access for multiple services behind a single IP, which helps reduce cloud costs and simplifies DNS management.

  Features of Ingress

  • Path-based routing (/api goes to one service, /app to another)

  • Host-based routing (api.example.com vs. app.example.com)

  • TLS termination

  • Middleware support like authentication, rate limiting, and request rewrites (depending on the controller)

  Pros and Cons

  Pros	Cons
  Efficient: expose many services via one IP	Extra complexity compared to LoadBalancer
  Supports TLS termination	Requires installing and managing a controller
  Ideal for web apps and APIs	Primarily HTTP/HTTPS only
  Cost-efficient in cloud environments	Not suitable for raw TCP/UDP services

  Example YAML Configuration

  yaml

  apiVersion: networking.k8s.io/v1
kind: Ingress
metadata:
name: example-ingress
annotations:
nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/rewrite-target: /
spec:
tls:
- hosts:
- example.com
secretName: tls-secret
rules:
- host: example.com
http:
paths:
- path: /app
pathType: Prefix
backend:
service:
name: my-app-service
port:
number: 80


  This configuration:

  • Routes example.com/app to the my-app-service

  • Uses TLS termination via a Kubernetes secret

  Next up: “Kubernetes Ingress vs LoadBalancer: Key Differences” — a head-to-head comparison to help you decide which is right for your use case.

  ---

  Kubernetes Ingress vs LoadBalancer: Key Differences

  Understanding the distinctions between a LoadBalancer service and Ingress can help you choose the right approach for exposing your Kubernetes workloads.

  Here’s a side-by-side comparison:

  Feature	LoadBalancer	Ingress
  Layer	L4 (TCP/UDP)	L7 (HTTP/HTTPS)
  External IP Assignment	Yes	Usually via LoadBalancer service
  Routing Capabilities	Basic	Advanced (host/path-based)
  TLS Termination	No	Yes
  Complexity	Simpler	More configurable and flexible
  Cost in Cloud	Higher (one LB per service)	Lower (one LB for many apps)

  When to Use LoadBalancer

  A LoadBalancer is a great fit in the following scenarios:

  • ✅ Simplicity: You just need to expose a single service with minimal configuration.

  • ✅ Non-HTTP/HTTPS traffic: You’re dealing with TCP/UDP-based applications such as databases or game servers.

  • ✅ Dev/testing environments: You’re running small clusters or doing quick deployments where setup time matters more than long-term optimization.

  In the next section, we’ll explore when and why to use Ingress, especially for more complex, multi-service web applications.

  When to Use Ingress

  Kubernetes Ingress is a powerful option when your application architecture involves multiple web services and more complex routing needs.

  Unlike the simpler LoadBalancer, Ingress allows fine control over how traffic flows within your cluster.

  ✅ Hosting Multiple Services Under One IP

  Ingress can manage traffic for multiple applications using a single external IP, making it a cost-effective and scalable solution.

  With host-based (e.g., app.example.com) and path-based (e.g., /api, /blog) routing rules, you can route traffic to different services from one entry point.

  ✅ Needing Fine-Grained HTTP Routing

  Ingress controllers like NGINX or Traefik support advanced routing features, such as:

  • Rewrite rules

  • Redirects

  • Rate limiting

  • WebSocket support

  • URL path rewrites and headers management

  This makes Ingress ideal for microservice-based web applications that require detailed control of HTTP/S traffic.

  ✅ Using TLS Termination or Authentication

  Ingress allows you to terminate TLS connections at the edge, simplifying certificate management. You can also add authentication, such as basic auth or integration with OAuth, at the Ingress level—reducing the burden on downstream services.

  Next, we’ll break down the decision process further and help you choose the right approach based on your infrastructure and application needs.

  ---

  Combining LoadBalancer and Ingress

  In many production-grade Kubernetes environments, the best approach is to combine both LoadBalancer and Ingress to get the benefits of external accessibility and advanced HTTP routing.

  🔗 Expose Ingress Controller Using a LoadBalancer

  The most common and recommended pattern is to:

  1. Deploy an Ingress controller (such as NGINX, HAProxy, or Traefik) into your cluster.

  2. Expose that Ingress controller with a LoadBalancer service, which provisions a single external IP from your cloud provider or bare-metal setup (e.g., with MetalLB).

  This setup looks like:

  yaml

  apiVersion: v1
kind: Service
metadata:
name: ingress-nginx-controller
namespace: ingress-nginx
spec:
type: LoadBalancer
selector:
app.kubernetes.io/name: ingress-nginx
ports:
- port: 80
targetPort: http
- port: 443
targetPort: https


  The LoadBalancer makes your Ingress controller publicly accessible, and the Ingress rules then manage how that traffic is routed inside the cluster.

  ✅ Best Practice for Production

  • Efficient: You only pay for one external LoadBalancer, regardless of how many apps you run.

  • Flexible: Add TLS, authentication, rate limiting, and rewrite rules via Ingress.

  • Scalable: Works well with auto-scaling and microservices architectures.

  This hybrid approach is ideal for multi-service applications, enterprise-grade deployments, and cloud-native environments.

  Considerations for Bare-Metal Deployments

  While cloud providers like AWS, GCP, and Azure offer native support for LoadBalancer services, bare-metal Kubernetes clusters require extra configuration to expose services externally.

  Here are some important considerations:

  🚫 Lack of Native LoadBalancer Support

  In a bare-metal environment, Kubernetes doesn’t have a built-in way to provision external IP addresses for LoadBalancer services.

  This means:

  • No automatic provisioning of external IPs

  • Manual IP assignment or third-party solutions are required

  🔄 Alternatives: MetalLB + Ingress Controller

  To replicate cloud-native behavior, many teams adopt the following setup:

  • MetalLB: Provides Layer 2 or BGP-based external IP allocation for bare-metal clusters.

  • Ingress Controller (like NGINX, HAProxy, or Traefik): Manages L7 routing, TLS termination, and advanced traffic rules.

  • MetalLB exposes the Ingress controller via a LoadBalancer service.

  For example:

  yaml

  apiVersion: v1
kind: Service
metadata:
name: nginx-ingress
namespace: ingress-nginx
spec:
type: LoadBalancer
loadBalancerIP: 192.168.1.240
ports:
- port: 80
targetPort: http
- port: 443
targetPort: https
selector:
app.kubernetes.io/name: ingress-nginx


  This pattern is both cost-effective and flexible for self-hosted environments.

  🌐 Network Design and Traffic Flow

  When using MetalLB and an Ingress controller:

  • Ensure external IPs are routable within your LAN or data center

  • Use BGP mode for greater control and high availability (requires BGP-capable routers)

  • Consider integrating HAProxy or NGINX behind MetalLB for advanced Layer 7 logic (see our comparison of HAProxy vs MetalLB)

  This design enables a production-ready, cloud-like experience on bare metal.

  ---

  Conclusion

  Exposing services in Kubernetes is a fundamental part of building scalable and accessible applications.

  Both Ingress and LoadBalancer offer ways to handle this—but they operate at different layers and suit different use cases.

  🔑
  Kubernetes Ingress vs LoadBalancer:
  Summary of Key Points

  • LoadBalancer operates at Layer 4 (TCP/UDP) and is typically used to expose a single service with a direct external IP. It’s simple and effective, especially in cloud environments with native support.

  • Ingress operates at Layer 7 (HTTP/HTTPS) and allows fine-grained routing, TLS termination, and consolidating multiple services under one external IP. It requires an Ingress controller like NGINX or Traefik.

  • In bare-metal clusters, tools like MetalLB are essential to bring LoadBalancer functionality, often used in conjunction with an Ingress controller.

  🧭 Decision Guide

  Use Case	Recommended Option
  Simple service exposure in the cloud	LoadBalancer
  Multiple HTTP services under one IP	Ingress
  Bare-metal environment	MetalLB + Ingress
  Advanced routing and TLS offloading	Ingress
  TCP/UDP services	LoadBalancer

  ✅
  Kubernetes Ingress vs LoadBalancer: 
  Recommendations for Production Environments

  • Cloud: Use a LoadBalancer to expose your Ingress controller, then route traffic using Ingress rules.

  • Bare-Metal: Pair MetalLB with an Ingress controller to replicate cloud functionality with flexible traffic management.

  • Monitor usage, enforce security policies, and use observability tools like Prometheus and Grafana to maintain visibility and performance.

  For a deeper dive into related topics, check out our guides on:

  • HAProxy vs MetalLB

  • Optimizing Kubernetes Resource Limits

  • Load Balancer for Kubernetes