Compare
MPLS, SD-WAN, sdMPLS®: the comparison
Ten criteria, three columns, one consistent colour code. Then the objections we hear, and our answers.
Operator MPLS, SD-WAN and sdMPLS do not sit at the same level: the first is the operator's private network, the second a software layer on top of your links, the third your own core network, virtualised at the operator. The table below compares what each one actually delivers.
Operator MPLSSD-WANsdMPLS
| Criterion | Operator MPLS | SD-WAN | sdMPLS |
|---|---|---|---|
| What it is | The operator's private network | A software layer on top of your links | Your own core network, virtualised at the operator |
| Who controls the core network | The operator, alone | The customer controls its site equipment and policies; the operator's core stays out of reach | The customer, through its VRB |
| Access links | Specific, costly MPLS links | Standard Internet links | Standard access links (FTTH, FTTO, xDSL, 4G/5G), collected directly into the core |
| Inter-site traffic | The operator's private network | Public Internet, encrypted | Private network, off the public Internet, direct collection into the core |
| Cost | Premium of about 2.9× vs business Internet | Licences + links, 20 to 30% savings through optimisation | Price of standard links + VRB |
| Site activation | 60 to 120 days | Days to weeks | Days (existing link); changes take effect instantly |
| Performance | Guaranteed (SLA) | Best effort over the Internet | Backbone performance, 3M+ pps per VM (public benchmark in preparation) |
| WAN + voice + cloud | Three separate infrastructures | Optimises the WAN; voice and cloud stay on separate infrastructures | A single infrastructure |
| Vendor lock-in | High (hardware, long contracts) | Medium (vendor control plane) | Low (open standards: VXLAN, EVPN) |
| Scalability | Limited by the operator | Central orchestrator, 1,000 to 2,000 sites max | Spine-leaf architecture, no central bottleneck |
Modern SD-WANs can segment, encrypt, route dynamically and prioritise flows over a site's links. This comparison is not about those edge functions, but about what happens between the sites: who controls the core, and where the traffic goes.
Market figures (×2.9 premium, 60 to 120 days, 20 to 30%, 1,000 to 2,000 sites): Flex.eu synthesis of public market data (analysts, operators), SDO study, March 2026. VRB performance: 3M+ pps per VM, public benchmark in preparation; no quantified comparison with other routers is published before the benchmark. The MPLS column refers to a contractual guarantee (SLA); sdMPLS speaks of control of the core and backbone performance, and the service commitments are those of the contract.
On mobile, the table scrolls horizontally; the criteria column stays visible.
Objections
The objections we hear, and our answers
Six questions asked by CIOs, telecom consultancies and incumbent operators. Click to expand.
“It's just another SD-WAN.”
No: an SD-WAN is an overlay sitting on top of a network it does not control. sdMPLS virtualises the core network itself and hands you its control. The difference shows as soon as you talk about end-to-end QoS, from each site's access all the way to the core and the Internet exit, segmentation or traffic engineering.
“Without MPLS, there is no performance guarantee.”
The MPLS guarantee comes from control of the core, not from the protocol. sdMPLS keeps a private, controlled core; it is the access links that become standard.
Concretely, the SDO core is deployed as a geo-cluster, on two hosting sites with two core networks each, with 99.95% availability and a 4-hour guaranteed time to repair (GTR), 24/7, included. These commitments cover the core network; at the access, the type of link chosen site by site (dedicated fibre with guaranteed bandwidth or shared fibre) sets the level of commitment. Since the path is controlled from the access to the core and the Internet exit, QoS applies end to end.
“Running a backbone is too complex for my team.”
The VRB exposes what a network team already knows how to do (routing, QoS, VLANs/segments). What the customer controls is its policy; running the core remains the operator's job. And the distributor can operate the VRB on the customer's behalf.
“You are a small player, that's risky.”
sdMPLS is built on open standards (VXLAN, EVPN, FRR), not on proprietary technology: the customer is not locked in. The operator Flex.eu already runs a network of more than 135 distributors, with voice and cloud services in production.
The SDO core has been in production since 2019, after more than five years of research and development. More than 10,000 FTTH, FTTE and FTTO links are connected to it today, on four core networks spread over two hosting sites, so as to remain available whatever the failure.
“We already have an SD-WAN, why change?”
The SD-WAN stays; it only selects a path. sdMPLS replaces what sits underneath. And it removes the second infrastructure (cloud, voice) that SD-WAN does not handle.
“The term sdMPLS is misleading, it isn't MPLS.”
Correct, and deliberate: sdMPLS delivers the capabilities that businesses were looking for in MPLS (a private, controlled core), in a software-defined way. Just as SD-WAN is not a WAN but a software way of doing WAN.
Going further
Understanding sdMPLS
The full explanation in ten sections, with the diagrams.
Read →The technology
SDO, VXLAN/EVPN core, VRB, open standards, performance, access links.
Technical details →Writing an invitation to tender
The neutral functional definition and the criteria grid to open your tender to the third way.
Consultants' area →Planned for V2: filters by criterion and PDF export of the comparison.